CRL.M.C No.2499 of 2023

## `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 2499 OF 2023 CRIME NO.37/2023 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ``` ## `- PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3 :` - `1 RAJESH AGED 45 YEARS S/O.SASI, TC 13/948, THOTTUVARAMBIL HOUSE, KANNAMMOOLA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011` - `2 SABU.Y AGED 52 YEARS S/O.YESODHARAN, VALIYA VILAKATH VEEDU, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011` - `3 SHAJI.S AGED 35 YEARS S/O.SALEEM.P., TC 76/1421, MULLUR VEEDU, ANAYARA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695029 BY ADV SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY` ## `- RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT :` ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2RISHAD, AGED 24 YEARS S/O.SAMAD, NEAR JUMA ATH PALLI, MADAKAKARA WARD, CHEMANCHERY VILLAGE, CHENKOTTUKAVU TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673304 ``` ``` SRI MP PRASHANTH PP ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 2 ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.** **------------------------------------Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 ------------------------------------------Dated this the 5th day of June, 2023** ## **ORDER** The petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.37/2023 of the Medical College Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. In the aforesaid crime, the petitioners are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and r/w Section 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Sri Suman Chakravarthy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that the parties have settled their disputes and they are not desirous of pursuing the prosecution proceedings. Reliance is placed on Annexure -2 affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent to substantiate his contention. According to the learned counsel, if the proceedings are terminated, recording the amicable settlement, the parties can embark upon their future paths in an atmosphere of tranquility and mutual respect. It is submitted that though the Apex Court has held that Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 3 crimes registered under Section 27 of the Arms Act cannot fittingly be quashed on the basis of settlement, the fact remains that no valid notification has been issued to bring the local area within the ambit of the provisions under the Act Reliance is placed on **Stephen vs. State of Kerala** [2018 (4) KHC 58] and **Jinu vs. State of Kerala** [2017 (5) KHC 565] to substantiate his contention. 3. When the matter had come up for admission, this court had directed the investigating officer concerned to record the statement of the defacto complainant/injured/victim and report as to whether the assertion in the petition and the affidavit filed in support that entire disputes have been resolved between the parties concerned is true and genuine. The investigating officer was also directed to report as to whether the petitioners are persons with criminal antecedents and whether there is any other impediment in terminating the criminal proceedings. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the criminal proceedings. It is submitted that the Apex Court in **State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan,[1]** has laid down the principles and had observed that quashing of proceedings on the basis of 1 (2019) 5 SCC 688 Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 4 settlement would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. He would point out that the Apex Court had observed that while quashing the proceedings, the court will have to consider whether the crime is against the society or against an individual alone and also the character, conduct, and antecedents of the accused. He would point out that the 1st accused is involved in as many as 45 crimes registered at various police stations and the 2nd petitioner in 12 crimes. Their criminal antecedents should dissuade this Court in quashing the proceedings, contends the learned public prosecutor. 5. I have considered the submissions and have gone through the records. 6. In **State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan,[2]** , a three-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has summarised the law as laid down in **3 Gian Singh v. State of Punjab** , **Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab4** , **State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat5** , **State of M.P. v. Deepak6, State of M.P. v. Manish7** , **J. Ramesh Kamath v. Mohana** 2 [(2019) 5 SCC 688] 3 (2012) 10 SCC 303 4 2014 (6) SCC 466 5 (2014) 4 SCC 149 6 (2014) 10 SCC 285 7 (2015) 8 SCC 307 5 Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 ## **Kurup8** ; **State of M.P. v. Rajveer Singh9** , **Parbatbhai Aahir v. State** **of Gujarat10, State of M.P. v. Kalyan Singh11 and State of M.P. v. Dhruv Gurjar12** . It was laid down as under: 15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under: - 15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 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; - 15.2. 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; - 15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the 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 - 8 2016) 12 SCC 179 9 (2016) 12 SCC 471 10 (2017) 9 SCC 641 11 (2019) 4 SCC 268 12 (2019) 5 SCC 570] Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 6 ## compromise between the victim and the offender; 15.4. Offences under Section 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 alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 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 Section 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 Section 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 Section 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/delicate 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 paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove; Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 7 - 15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of noncompoundable offenses, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact 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. 7. Petitioners 1 and 2 are involved in a multitude of crimes during the past several years. Needless to say, their continuous involvement necessarily has societal ramifications. It will have to be construed as a transgression infringing upon the fabric of society rather than a private dispute. Consequently, it is infeasible to terminate the ongoing criminal proceedings on the basis of a settlement arrived at with the de facto complainant. This Court is also unsure whether the settlement was arrived at with a free or open mind or whether it was obtained by threat or coercion, given the criminal antecedents of the accused and their propensity to involve in crimes disturbing the peace, one after the other. I have no doubt in my mind that the action of the petitioners in 8 ## Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 continuously engaging in crimes has a significant and adverse societal impact. The Apex Court had also observed that while considering the prayer for quashing on the basis of settlement, this Court is bound to consider the antecedents and conduct of the accused and the manner in which the accused had managed to enter into a compromise. Having considered the facts and circumstances and the antecedents of petitioners 1 and 2, I am not inclined to exercise the powers conferred on this Court under Section 482 of the Code to put a premature end to the prosecution. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE** SMA 9 Crl.M.C No.2499 of 2023 ## `APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2499/2023` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES : ``` ``` Annexure-1A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO.37/2023 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION ``` ``` Annexure-2THE ORIGINAL NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 14.03.2023 ``` ``` Annexure-3A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.02.2023 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.574/2023 ```