CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 6[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 15TH KARTHIKA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 4182 OF 2021** **CRIME NO.103/2021 OF KUTHUPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 671/2021 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT ,KUTHUPARAMBA** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO1 TO 6:** 1 ASHRAF P.C. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.MAHAMOOD A.K., MAHAMOOD A.K., BAITHUL RAHMA, UKKASMOTTA, KADIRUR, KADIRUR P.O., ERUVATTY, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 642. 2 JIYAD MASHOOD AGED 21 YEARS S/O.MASHOOD V.P., BLLOM VILLA, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O., KUTHUPARAMBA, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 643. 3 MUHAMMED ASIF V.V. AGED 20 YEARS S/O.ASHARAF V.V., VALIYAVEETTIL, PUTHUR, PUTHUR P.O., PANOOR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 692. 4 MOHAMMED INSHA A. AGED 20 YEARS S/O.MOHAMMED RAFEEK, AL-INSHAD, VETTUMMAL, P.O.KOTTAYAMPOYIL, PATHAYAKUNNU, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 691. 5 MUHAMMED FAHIS AGED 20 YEARS S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ P.P., KOOVAKKANDY HOUSE, OLAVILAM P.O., CHOKLI, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 673 313. 6 MUHAMMED NIHAL P.C. AGED 20 YEARS S/O.HANEEFA T., PALATHUMKARA HOUSE, KOTTAYAM ANGADI, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O., MANGATTITAM, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 643. CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 2 7 AKSHAY S.RAMESH AGED 21 YEARS S/O.RAMESHAN N., SHIVOHAM, SWAMIKUNNU, DHARMADAM P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 106. 8 MUHAMMED JISHIN JAMAL T.C.P. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.JAMAL, 'NAFSA', MADAM, MUZAPPILANGAD P.O., KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 662. 9 MUHAMMED DULDUL SAVER AGED 21 YEARS S/O.SIRAJ, TEMPLE GATE P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 102. 10 SHAHAZOOR ASLAM AGED 21 YEARS S/O.ASLAM, SHALIMAR, VENGAD P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 612. 11 MUZHAR ZAMHAR T.K. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.MAHAZOOD T.P., T.P.HOUSE, CHAKKIYATH MUKKU, TEMPLE GATE P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 102. 12 SHAZIN FAZAL P.A. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.K.N.AHAMMED FAZAL, MANZAR, MADAPEEDIKA, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 671. 13 AAKARSHA RATHNAKARAN K. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.RATHNAKARAN K., AMOR, KULAM, P.O.IRIVERI, MOWANCHERI, KANNUR - 670 613. 14 MOHAMMED SHAHIL V.V. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.ABOOBACKER K.M., RAMSHANA MANZIL, KARYATTUPURAM, MUTHIYANGA, PATHAYAKKUNNU, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 691. 15 MUHAMMED SINAN K.K. AGED 20 YEARS S/O.NOUSHAD, KUNDAM KULAM, KAMBITHOON, SANKARANELLUR P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 3 DISTRICT - 670 643. 16 MOHAMED MARJAN AGED 20 YEARS S/O.MAJEED MOHAMMED, NIMSHAS, AKG ROAD, MUZHAPPILANGAD, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 662. BY ADVS. K.VISWAN D.ARUN BOSE ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/CW 2 & 3:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. 2 NABEEL.K AGED 20 YEARS S/O.IBRAHIM, 'ALMINAS', KANNAMVELLI, PANOOR P.O., PUTHOOR, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, PIN - 670 692. 3 HISHAM ULLIVEETTIL HAMEED AGED 20 YEARS S/O.ULLIVEETTIL HAMEED, 'SHAREEFAS', PO.KOTTAYAM MALABAR, KINAVAKKAL, KUTHUPARAMBA, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, PIN - 670 643. ADDL.4 DR.PRAVEENA T.K AGED 54 YEARS, PRINCIPAL, MES COLLEGE, NARAVOOR, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR, KERALA , PIN-670643. IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R4 AS PER ORDER DATED 05.11.2021IN CRL.MA.NO.1/2021 IN CRL.MC.NO.4182/2021. ADDL.5 PRINCIPAL, MES COLLEGE, NARAVOOR, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR, KERALA . ADDL.5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 13.03.2023 IN CRL.MA.NO.1/2023 IN CRL.MC.NO.4182/2021. BY ADVS. CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 4 P.P.IRFAN RAJAN P.KALIYATH ARUN BOSE.D CIYARA O.M. ## **OTHER PRESENT:** SRI RENJITH TR, PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 5 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -** CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -** Dated this the 6[th] day of November, 2023 ## **ORDER** 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 in C.C.No.671/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kuthuparamba arising from Crime No.103/2021 of Kuthuparamba Police Station. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 323, 427 r/w Section 149 IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that the accused, who were students of the MES College, Kuthuparamba, wrongfully confined the victims and assaulted the victims and committed mischief. The victims filed an affidavit stating that they have no objection. The de-facto complainant in this case is the Principal of the College. The case was registered based on a complaint filed by the then CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 6 Principal of the College. Therefore, then Principal and the present Principal were impleaded as the additional respondent Nos.4 and 5. Notice was issued to them. They did not appeared before this Court. Since, victims have already settled the matter with the petitioners, I think this settlement can be accepted. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavit 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 affidavit filed by the CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 7 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 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_ CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 8 _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 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 non- compoundable offences, which_ CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 9 _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.”_ 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 C.C.No.671/2021 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kuthuparamba arising from Crime No.103/2021 of Kuthuparamba Police Station are quashed. Sd/- ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** bng CRL.MC No.4182 of 2021 10 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4182/2021** PETITIONERS ANNEXURES Annexure I CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR NO.103/2021 OF KUTHUPARAMBA POLICE STATION DATED 10/03/2021. Annexure II CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN FIR NO.103/2021 DATED 28/05/2021. Annexure III AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY RESPONDENT NO.2. Annexure IV AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY RESPONDENT NO.3.