CRL.MC No. 8946 of 2023

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 13[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 22ND KARTHIKA, 1945 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 CRIME NO.439/2017 OF ANCHUTHENGU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN SC 403/2018 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, ATTINGAL ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3:`** ``` 1SACHU, AGED 24 YEARS,S/O. ALEX, MUNDUTHURA VEEDU, MUNDUTHURA, MAMPALLY DESOM, ANCHUTHENGU P. O. & VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695141. 2SHIJO, AGED 30 YEARS,S/O. BENJAMIN, MUNDUTHURA VEEDU, MUNDUTHURA, MAMPALLY DESOM, ANCHUTHENGU P. O. & VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695141. 3SAJU @ UNNI, AGED 30 YEARS,S/O. ALEX, MUNDUTHURA VEEDU, MUNDUTHURA, MAMPALLY DESOM, ANCHUTHENGU P. O. & VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695141. BY ADVS. SRI. R. RAJESH (VARKALA) SRI. M. KIRANLAL SRI. T. S. SARATH SRI. MANU RAMACHANDRAN SRI. SAMEER M. NAIR SMT. SAILAKSHMI MENON ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS /STATE, DE FACTO COMPLAINANT AND INJURED:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031. 2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ANCHUTHENGU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL DISTRICT, PIN – 695001. ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 2 ``` 3SHIBIN, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. JERRY PEEYUS, CHEELANTHIMOODU VEEDU, MUNDUTHURA, MAMPALLY, ANCHUTHENGU P.O. & VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695309. 4ANIL, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. SEBASTIAN, CHEELANTHIMOODU VEEDU, MUNDUTHURA, MAMPALLY, ANCHUTHENGU P.O. & VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695309. BY ADV. SRI. M. P. PRASANTH – PP SRI. SABITH MOHAMMED ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 3 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** **-------------------------------Crl.M.C. No. 8946 of 2023 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 13[th] day of November, 2023** ## **O R D E R** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in S. C. No. 403 of 2018 on the files of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Attingal arising from Crime No.439 of 2017 of Anchuthengu Police Station. The above case is chargesheeted alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 308, 427 and 34 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that the accused wrongfully confined the victims and assaulted the victims using filthy language and the victims sustained injury. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 4 pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavits filed by the victims in support of his contention. The counsel appearing for the victims also submitted that the matter is settled and the victims have no objection in quashing the prosecution. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on the basis of the settlement. But the Public Prosecutor conceded that the matter is settled between the parties. 6. This Court has considered the submission of the petitioners, victims and the Public Prosecutor and has also gone through the records including the affidavits filed by the victims. ## 7. In **State of Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan and** **Others (2019 (5) SCC 688),** three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The apex court in **Laxmi Narayan** 's case (supra) also relied on the law laid ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 5 down in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (2012 (10) SCC 303)** and **Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another (2014 (6) SCC 466)** . The apex court in paragraph 13 of the **Laxmi Narayan** 's case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted hereunder: _“13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein above, it is observed and held as under:_ _i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non - compoundable offences under S.320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;_ _ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;_ _iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;_ _iv) offences under S.307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual_ ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 6 _alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of S.307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of S.307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under S.307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital / delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above;_ _v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of noncompoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement / compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.”_ ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 7 8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the Apex Court, this Court perused the facts in this case and also perused the documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire facts and circumstances I am of the considered opinion that the dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be accepted. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in S. C. No. 403 of 2018 on the files of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Attingal arising from Crime No.439 of 2017 of Anchuthengu Police Station are quashed. **Sd/P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** Svn ``` CRL.MC NO. 8946 OF 2023 ``` 8 ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8946/2023`** ## **`PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES`** - `ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.439/2017 OF ANCHUTHENGU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL DISTRICT` ``` ANNEXURE A2THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.439/2017 OF ANCHUTHENGU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL DISTRICT WHICH IS NOW PENDING AS S.C NO. 403/2018 BEFORE THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT ``` ``` ANNEXURE A3THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT GIVEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/ DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 07.10.2023 ``` ``` ANNEXURE A4THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT FILED AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 07.10.2023 ```