Crl.M.C. No. 1110 of 2014

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/25TH MAGHA, 1935** ## **Crl.MC.No. 1110 of 2014** ## **------------------------------------** ## **CRIME NO. 1139/2008 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION , KOLLAM.** **----------------** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** **------------------------------------** **1. CHERAN, BUSINESS MANAGER, OLAM GROUP OF COMPANIES, BISHOP JEROME NAGAR, KOLLAM.** ## **2. K.P.THOMAS,** ## **DY. GENERAL MANAGER, DO-DO.** ## **3. YESUDAS,** - **DO-DO.** ## **4. SUNNY VARGHESE,** **DO-DO.** **5. ASOK KRISHEN, DO-DO.** **BY ADV. SRI.T.R.ASWAS** ## **RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:** **------------------------------------------------** **1. N.NANDAKUMAR, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.NANU, LAKSHMI BHAVAN, GANAPATHY NAGAR, THAMARAKULAM CHERRY, KOLLAM-690 001.** ## **2. THE SUB INSPECTOR, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.HYMA.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **MSD.** **CRL.MC.NO. 1110 OF 2014 ------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **----------------** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: -------------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE A: CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.1139/08 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE B: ORDER DATED 06.01.2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT.** **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: ---------------------------------------------** ## **NIL** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A.TO JUDGE.** Msd. K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J. -----------------------------------------------------------------Crl. M.C. No.1110 of 2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 14[th] day of February, 2014 ## O R D E R This criminal miscellaneous case is filed by the accused in Crime No.1139/2008 of Kollam East Police Station, to quash the proceedings in view of the settlement arrived at between the defacto-complainant and the petitioners before the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 5 in Crime No.1139/2008 of Kollam East Police Station, which was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the first respondent as defactocomplainant. The investigation is still in progress. No final report has been filed in this case. There were several litigations between the petitioners and the first respondent and all these disputes were settled before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and a compromise was field before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case pending before the 2 Crl. M.C. No.1110 of 2014 Hon'ble Supreme Court as Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.31293/2011 and other petitions. The disputes and the cases pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court were disposed of on the basis of the settlement, as per AnnexureB Judgment. One of the condition in the settlement was that, the defacto-complainant will withdraw all the cases against the petitioner and he will co-operate with the petitioners in quashing the proceedings before the High Court. It is on that basis, that the present petition has been filed to quash Annexure-A First Information Report, registered against the petitioners and further proceedings thereon, invoking the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. The first respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled and on the basis of the settlement, all the cases between the parties were disposed of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and they have agreed to withdraw this prosecution as well, as Crl. M.C. No.1110 of 2014 3 part of the settlement and they have no objection in allowing the application. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, in this case, since they could not trace out the real suspects, only an U.N. report has been filed before the concerned court. 5. Heard both sides. 6. It is an admitted fact that, on the basis of the complaint given by the first respondent /defactocomplainant, Anenxure-A First Information Report was registered as Crime No.1139/2008 under Section 120B, 465, 467, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the present petitioners. Since the investigating officer could not complete the investigation and they could not get material to file final report, they filed a U.N. report before the court. It is also seen from the documents produced that as per Annexure-B, Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, that all the disputes between the parties have been 4 Crl. M.C. No.1110 of 2014 settled and the cases pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court were disposed of on the basis of the settlement. One of the conditions mentioned in the settlement as condition No. (vii) was that: “(vii) In view of the compromise herein, the respondent agree that they shall not object quashing of the FIR in Crime No.1139/08 of Kollam East Police Station registered against the petitioner and others, in appropriate criminal proceedings which the petitioner and others may from now institute before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala.” The defacto-complainant will co-operate with the petitioners by filing necessary application before the High Court to quash the same. It is on that basis the present petition has now filed. 7. The counsel for the first respondent also submitted that, the entire matter has been settled due to the intervention of the parties. There is no public interest involved in the case, as it is purely a monitory transaction between the petitioners and the first respondent. In the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012** Crl. M.C. No.1110 of 2014 5 ## **(4) KLT 108 (SC)],** the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held ## that: “But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc., or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of the criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.” So in view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that the matter has been settled as evidenced by Annexure-B order of the Supreme Court, no purpose will be served in continuing the case. So I feel that Crl. M.C. No.1110 of 2014 6 it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of the 'Code' has to be invoked to quash the proceedings. Hence the application is allowed and further proceedings in Annexure-A (Crime No.1139/2008 of Kollam East Police Station), against the petitioners is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned magistrate court to be informed to the concerned police Station, for necessary further action in this regard. Sd/K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy // P.A. to Judge ss