High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2019-03-18Quashed

Crl.M.C. Nos. 2088 of 2019 and 2064 of 2019, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

Case / Petition Number:Crl.M.C. Nos. 2088/2019 and 2064/2019

Neutral Citation:?

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Alexander Thomas
Judgment Date: 2019-03-18
Court Decision / Holding: The impugned final reports (Anx-A2) in Crime No.95/2014 (CC 639/2016) and Crime No.92/2014 (CC 1298/2016) and all further proceedings arising therefrom are quashed under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. The petitions are allowed, and the prosecutions are terminated.
Final Disposition: Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Jyothi Krishna
Kunjamma

Respondents

Kunjamma
State of Kerala
Jyothi Krishna

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• N.R. Sangeetharaj
• Dinesh Mathew J. Muricken

Counsels for Respondents

• Dinesh Mathew J. Muricken
• N.R. Sangeeth Raj
• Ajmad Ali

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a joint criminal miscellaneous petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging two separate criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners under provisions of the IPC, arising from two Vanitha Police Station FIRs in Ernakulam district. Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019 concerns Crime No.95/2014, registered for an offence punishable under Sec.323 IPC, where Jyothi Krishna is the accused and Kunjamma is the de facto complainant. Crl.M.C.No.2064/2019 concerns Crime No.92/2014, registered for offences under Secs.294(b), 341, 323 and 332 IPC, where Kunjamma is the petitioner and Jyothi Krishna is the de facto complainant. In both petitions, the prayer is to quash the ongoing proceedings on the ground that the disputes between the parties have been settled, evidenced by affidavits (Anxs-A3) sworn by the de facto complainants. The court notes that affidavits affirm that the entire disputes are settled and that there is no objection to quashing. Relying on Supreme Court opinions Gian Singh v State of Punjab and Narinder Singh and others v State of Punjab (para 29), the court concludes that in appropriate cases, even non-compoundable offences may be quashed under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. where there is genuine settlement and no public interest in continuing the prosecution. Accordingly, the final reports (Anx-A2) in both cases and all further proceedings are quashed, and the petitions are disposed of in favor of quashing.

Provisions of Law Cited

Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C.Sec.323 IPCSec.294(b) IPCSec.341 IPCSec.332 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160; (2012) 10 SCC 303
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr (2014) 6 SCC 466

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicants seek quashing of the pending criminal proceedings on the ground of genuine settlement between the accused and the de facto complainants. They rely on the settled affidavits (Anxs-A3) confirming that all disputes have been resolved and that there is no objection to quashing the cases. They argue that continuing prosecutions would waste judicial time and would not serve any public interest, especially after the parties have amicably settled. They invoke principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh and Narinder Singh to contend that High Courts may exercise inherent powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to quash even non-compoundable offences when a genuine settlement exists and no public interest requires continuation of the proceedings.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents acknowledge the settlement evidenced by affidavits and affirm that there is no objection to quashing the proceedings. They rely on the settled position of law that the High Court may exercise its inherent powers to quash when there is a genuine settlement and no public interest in continuation, provided the affidavits and materials support such action. They do not oppose the quashing in light of the affidavits and the nature of the settlements, aligning with the court’s eventual conclusion.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab	2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160; (2012) 10 SCC 303	Positive	Cited as authority for quashing criminal proceedings under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. where there is a genuine settlement, even in cases involving non-compoundable offences.
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr	2014 (6) SCC 466	Positive	Cited for the proposition that settlement and no public interest in continuation can justify quashing, as applied in para 29 of the judgment.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Crl.M.C. Nos. 2088 of 2019 and 2064 of 2019, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1940** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2088 of 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 639/2016 of JUDL.M.F.C.I,ERNAKULAM CRIME NO. 95/2014 OF Vanitha Cell, EKM , Ernakulam** **PETITIONER/S:** **JYOTHI KRISHNA, AGED 49 YEARS W/O.VENUGOPAL, DEVANJALI HOUSE, UZHUVA VILLAGE, PATTANAKKADU.P.O., CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688531.** **BY ADV. SRI.N.R.SANGEETHARAJ** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 KUNJAMMA, AGED 65 YEARS W/O.LATE AUGUSTINE, THOTTUKADAVIL HOUSE, CMS ROAD, CHERIAKADAVU, PALLURUTHY.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682006. 2 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682031. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI.DINESH MATHEWJ.MURIKKAN FOR R1, SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R2** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2064/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ::2:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1940 Crl.MC.No. 2064 of 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1298/2016 of JUDL.M.F.C.-I,ERNAKULAM** **CRIME NO. 92/2014 OF Vanitha Cell, EKM , Ernakulam** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **KUNJAMMA, AGED 65 YEARS** **W/O LATE AUGUSTINE, THOTTUKADAVIL HOUSE, CMS ROAD, CHERIAKADAVU, PALLURUTHY P.O.ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN 682 006** ## **BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 JYOTHI KRISHNA, AGED 49 YEARS W/O VENUGOPAL, DEVANJALI HOUSE, UZHUVA VILLAGE, PATTANAKKADU P.O.CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 688 531.** **2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 031.** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI.N.R.SANGEETH RAJ FOR R1, SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2088/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ::3:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J** . ----------------------------------Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 -----------------------------------------Dated this the 18[th] day of March, 2019. ## **O R D E R** The prayers made in these two Crl.M.Cs filed under Sec.482 of the Cr.PC invoking the inherent powers conferred on this Court as per that provision is to quash respective impugned criminal proceedings in these cases which essentially arise out of two crimes which are said to be case and counter case and the prayer for quashment in both these cases is made on the basis of settlement arrived at between the accused persons and defacto complainant. Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019 arises out of Anx-A1 FIR in Crime No.95/2014 of Vanitha Police Station, Ernakulam District, which has been registered for offence punishable under Sec.323 of the I.P.C, in which the petitioner is the accused therein and the 1[st] respondent herein is the defacto complainant therein in relation to that crime. Crl.M.C.No.2064/2019 arises out of counter case viz., Anx-A1 FIR in Crime No.92/2014 of Vanitha Police Station, Ernakulam District, which has been registered for offences punishable under Secs.294(b), 341, 323 & 332 of the I.P.C. The ::4:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 petitioner (Who is the accused in Crime No.95/2014) in Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019 is the contesting respondent (defacto complainant in Crime No.92/2014) in Crl.M.C.No.2064/2019. It is brought on record that the contesting respondent in Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019 has sworn to affidavit produced as AnxsA3 in that Crl.M.C whereby she has stated that the entire disputes against the petitioner-accused, have been fully settled and that she has no objection in quashing the pending criminal proceedings against the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019. So also the contesting respondent in Crl.M.C.No.2064/2019 has sworn to affidavit as Anxs-A3 therein stating the same aspects regarding settlement and also stated that she has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings. In Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019, the police after investigation has submitted impugned Anx-A2 final report in Crime No.95/2014 and the case is now pending as C.C.No.639/2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam. So also, in Crl.M.C.No.2064/2019, the police after investigation has submitted the impugned Anx-A2 final report in the impugned Crime No.92/2014. It is these proceedings that are sought to be quashed on the ground of settlement. ::5:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 2. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in _**Gian Singh** v._ _**State of Punjab**_ reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and _**Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr**_ . reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment. ::6:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 3. Accordingly, the following orders and directions are issued: (i) It is ordered in Crl.M.C.No.2088/2019 that the impugned Anx-A2 final report in Crime No.95/2014 of Vanitha Police Station, Ernakulam District, which is now pending as C.C.No.639/2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused therein will stand quashed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (ii) It is also ordered in Crl.M.C.No.2064/2019 that the impugned Anx-A2 final report in Crime No.92/2014 of Vanitha Police Station, Ernakulam District and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused therein will stand quashed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. With these observations and directions, these Crl.M.Cs stand finally disposed of. **Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.** bkn/- ::7:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 ## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2088/2019** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.95/2014 OF VANITHA POLICE STATION DATED 22.11.2014.** **ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC.NO.639/2016 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ERNAKULAM ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.95/2014 OF VANITHA POLICE STATION DATED 29.11.2014. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 28/02/2019.** ::8:: Crl.M.C.Nos.2088 & 2064 Of 2019 ## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2064/2019** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO 92/2014 OF VANITHA POLICE STATION DATED 18.11.2014** **ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO 1298/2016 ON THE FILE OF FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRE COURT-1, ERNAKULAM ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO 92/2014 OF VANITHA POLICE STATION DATED 29.11.2014 ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 28.2.2019**