CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022, IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 26[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` CRIME NO.436/2019 OF Badiadukka Police Station, Kasargod SC 142/2022 OF SUB COURT, KASARAGOD ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 15:`** ``` 1THAHSEEN SABAH @ SHEBU AGED 22 YEARS SON OF MUNEER, POOVALA HOUSE, CRUSHER ROAD, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 2SHEREEF AGED 32 YEARS SON OF MUHAMMED, POOVALA HOUSE, CRUSHER ROAD, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 3HAMEED AGED 50 YEARS SON OF MOITHU, BISMILLA MANZIL, NEERCHAL MASJID, NEERCHAL, BELA VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 4MUHAMMED IMTIYAS AGED 29 YEARS SON OF ABOOBACKER, BISMILLA HOUSE, NEERCHAL, BELA VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 5MUHAMMED NIYAS.N AGED 32 YEARS SON OF ABOOBACKER, POOVALA HOUSE, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` 6ISHAK.B.M AGED 32 YEARS SON OF MUHAMMED @ MAMMU, POOVALA HOUSE, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 7MUHAMMED FAYIS.M AGED 21 YEARS SON OF MOITHEEN, POOVALA HOUSE, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 8JAMSHEER.P.A SON OF SAYID, AGED 22 YEARS OPPOSITE NEERCHAL MUHUYUDHEEN JUMA MASJID, NEERCHAL, BELA VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 9RAMSHEED.P.A AGED 24 YEARS SON OF SAYID, OPPOSITE NEERCHAL MUHUYUDHEEN JUMA MASJID, NEERCHAL, BELA VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 10ISMAIL.B.Y AGED 28 YEARS SON OF MUHAMMED, ABDULLA QUATERS, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 11MUNEER BEDI AGED 45 YEARS SON OF ABDULLA HAJI.P, POOVALA HOUSE, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 3 ``` ``` 12MOITHU.P AGED 39 YEARS SON OF MUHAMMED, POOVALA HOUSE, NEAR NITHYANANDA HOTEL, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 13ILLYAS.P.A AGED 25 YEARS SON OF SAYID, OPPOSITE NEERCHAL MUHUYUDHEEN JUMA MASJID, NEERCHAL, BELA VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, \ KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 14SHUHAIB AGED 27 YEARS SON OF ABBAS.P, MADAVOOR HOUSE, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL, BELA VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 15MUHAMMED FAROOQ AGED 24 YEARS SON OF MOITHEEN, POOVALA HOUSE, NEERCHAL, NEERCHAL VILLAGE, BADIADKA, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 BY ADVS. A.ARUNKUMAR HEERAKRISHNA T.H. ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM -, PIN – 682031 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 4 ``` ``` 2SHREEJITH KUMAR.N.P AGED 29 YEARS SON OF PAKKEERA, R/AT PUDUKKOLI HOUSE, ULLODI.P.O, BELA VILLAGE, ``` ``` KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 ``` ``` 3GANESHA.M AGED 28 YEARS SON OF SASIKUMAR.A, R/AT MALLADKA HOUSE, NEERCHAL VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN – 671321 ``` ``` BY ADV ADV VIPIN T JOSE ADV SREEJA V. - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 5 ``` ## **`ORDER`** The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 15 in Crime No.436/2019 of Badiadka Police Station which is now pending as S.C. No.142/2022 before the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasargod. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case is that, on 20.12.2019 on 19.10 hours, the petitioner along with about 100 persons attacked the respondents 2 and 3 with stones and sticks and caused injuries to them. Annexure AI is the First Information Report and Annexure AII is the Final Report. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure AII. 3. Heard Sri.A.Arunkumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Sreeja V., learned Pubic Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri.Vipin T. Jose, learned counsel appearing for the 2[nd] respondent. 4. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the injured ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 6 ``` persons have sworn Annexure AIV and Annexure AV affidavits respectively. The aforesaid affidavits indicate that, the matter has been settled and the injured persons have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. They also conveyed that they have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3/injured persons also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the injured persons have reiterated that, they do not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. 5. Going through the materials available on record, it is discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioners herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 7 ``` that going by the decision in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108],** this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked. 6. It is true that one of the offences is under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 14 are having criminal antecedents. A1 is involved in two cases and the other accused persons named above are involved in one case. However, it is reported that, the aforesaid cases are in connection with the political rivalry between the parties and this case is also in connection with the aforesaid cases. The petitioner as well as the defacto complainant belonging to rival political parties. Now they have settled all the dispute between them and the cordial relationship between them has been restored. In such circumstances, I deem it appropriate to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and to quash the proceedings, so as to maintain peace and harmony among the people in the locality. ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 8 ``` Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure AII final report in No.436/2019 of Badiadka Police Station Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C. No.142/2022 pending before the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasargod as against the petitioners are hereby quashed. ``` Sd/- ``` ``` ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE ``` scs ``` CRL.MC NO. 5358 OF 2022 ``` ``` 9 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5358/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure AIA TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.436 OF 2019 OF BADIADKA POLICE STATION Annexure AIICERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 436 OF 2019 OF BADIADKA POLICE STATION Annexure AIIICERTIFIED COPY OF THE MEMO OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO.436 OF 2019 OF BADIADKA POLICE STATION Annexure AIVTHE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 Annexure AVTHE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 ```