High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2020-07-29Quashed

CRL.M.C. Nos. 2320 of 2020 and 2344 of 2020, High Court of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C. Nos. 2320 of 2020 and 2344 of 2020

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: V.G. Arun
Judgment Date: 2020-07-29
Court Decision / Holding: The petitions are allowed. The proceedings in CC No.104 of 2018 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur, and CC No.926 of 2018 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thrissur, are quashed.
Final Disposition: Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

SHEMEER
SUJEESH S
ARUN S
AMEER S
SIDHIQUE
SIRAJ
PAVITHRAN
UNNIKRISHNAN
MANIKANTAN
SIVAPRASAD
RIJIL

Respondents

STATE OF KERALA
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION
PAVITHRAN
MANIKANTAN
ABDUL GAFOOR
SHEMEER
SUJEESH S
ARUN S
SIRAJUDEEN

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Dr. K.P. Satheesan (Sr.)
• Sri. P.Mohandas (Ernakulam)
• Sri. S.Vibheeshanan
• Sri.K.Sudhinkumar
• Sri.S.K.Adhithyan
• Sri.K.K.Rajeev

Counsels for Respondents

• Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
• Sri.Sabu Pullan
• Sri.Gokul D Sudhakaran
• Dr. K.P.Satheesan (Sr.)
• Sri.P.Mohandas (Ernakulam)
• Sri.K.Sudhinkumar
• Sri.S.K.Adhithyan

Case Synopsis & Summary

These are two Criminal Miscellaneous Cases in the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam arising out of separate complaints registered at the Thrissur Town East Police Station in 2018. The petitioners in CRL.M.C.2320/2020 are Shemeer, Sujeesh S., Arun S., Ameee r S., Sidhique and Siraj. The petitioners in CRL.M.C.2344/2020 are Pavithran, Unnikrishnan, Manikantan, Sivaprasad and Rijil. Both petitions seek to quash proceedings now pending as CC 104/2018 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur, and CC 926/2018 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thrissur. The offences alleged include multiple IPC sections relating to rioting, wrongful restraint and assault, among others. It is stated that the incident originated from a dispute over the sale and delivery of fruits at the Vegetable and Fruits Market, Thrissur. The de facto complainant and several injured persons have filed affidavits asserting that the dispute has been settled amicably and that they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners. The Public Prosecutor confirms no criminal antecedents on the petitioners. On this basis, and in light of the legal position in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the court holds that continuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process and would not serve public interest, and grants the relief by quashing both sets of proceedings. The court emphasises that there is no possibility of conviction given the settlement and absence of public interest.

Provisions of Law Cited

IPC 143IPC 144IPC 147IPC 323IPC 326IPC 249(b)IPC 149IPC 451IPC 341IPC 324IPC 427

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Abuse of process of court
Amicable settlement / compromise in criminal proceedings
Public interest considerations in quashing criminal proceedings

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that there is an amicable settlement between the parties and that no public interest is involved in continuing the criminal proceedings. They highlight that the de facto complainant and injured persons have given affidavits admitting settlement and lack of subsisting grievance, and that the proceedings are likely to end in acquittals given there are no prospects of conviction in light of the settlement. Relying on Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, they urge that the proceedings should be quashed to prevent abuse of process and to uphold the principle of restorative justice.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents submitted that the disputes were settled via affidavits by the de facto complainant and injured persons, indicating no subsisting grievance, and that there is no public interest in perpetuating pointless prosecutions. They argued that the gravity of the offences and the need to maintain public order required a cautious approach; however, the affidavits and lack of antecedents were brought to the court’s attention to assess whether quashing would serve public interest.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab	(2008) 4 SCC 582	Positive	Cited as establishing that if there is an amicable settlement and no public interest involved, the court may quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process.
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another	(2012) 10 SCC 303	Positive	Affirmed the principle that criminal proceedings can be quashed in the public interest when there exists an amicable settlement and no likelihood of conviction.

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. 2320 of 2020 and 2344 of 2020, High Court of Kerala 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 V.G.ARUN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1942** **Crl.MC.No.2320 OF 2020(H)** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 104/2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,THRISSUR** **CRIME NO.244/2018 OF Town East Police Station , Thrissur** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**SHEMEER**| |---|---| ||**AGED 32 YEARS**| ||**S/O ABDUL GAFOOR, PUTHIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KUTTICHIRA**| ||**ROAD, KALATHODU, THRISSUR.**| |**2**|**SUJEESH.S**| ||**AGED 29 YEARS**| ||**S/O SURESH, KOLLARA VEEDU, AYYAPPANKAVU, VADAKKEKARA,**| ||**KOORKANCHERY, THRISSUR.**| |**3**|**ARUN S**| ||**AGED 25 YEARS**| ||**S/O SELVAN, AYINIKUNNATH HOUSE, GREE PARK,**| ||**MARIYADAMOOLA, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR.**| |**4**|**AMEER.S**| ||**AGED 28 YEARS**| ||**S/O SHERIF, PUTHANANGADI HOUSE, VIA GURUMANDIRAM,**| ||**VADAKKEKARA, KOORKANCHERRY, THRISSUR.**| |**5**|**SIDHIQUE,**| ||**AGED 54 YEARS**| ||**S/O SAITHAPPA, PUTHANANGADI HOUSE, JAWAN ROAD,**| ||**KOORKANCHERRY, THRISSUR.**| |**6**|**SIRAJ,**| ||**AGED 27 YEARS**| ||**S/O SIDHIQUE, PUTHANANGADI HOUSE, JAWAN ROAD,**| ||**KOORKANCHERRY, THRISSUR.**| **BY ADVS. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR SRI.S.K.ADHITHYAN** _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 2 ## **SRI.SABU PULLAN SRI.GOKUL D SUDHAKARAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHIPIN-682 031.** - **2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-680 001.** - **3 PAVITHRAN, AGED 40 YEARS** - **S/O SREEDHARAN, KANNANKORAN HOUSE, THAMPANKADAVU, THALIKULAM, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 569.** - **4 MANIKANTAN, AGED 35 YEARS** **S/O SREEDHARAN, KANNANKORAN HOUSE, THAMPANKADAVU, THALIKULAM, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR-680 569.** ## **R3-4 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.RAJEEV** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **PP SREEJA V.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.07.2020, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2344/2020(C), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 3 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1942** **Crl.MC.No.2344 OF 2020(C)** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 926/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,THRISSUR** **CRIME NO.280/2018 OF Town East Police Station , Thrissur** ## **PETITIONER/S:** |**1**|**PAVITHRAN,**| |---|---| ||**AGED 49 YEARS**| ||**S/O. SREEDHARAN, KANNANKORAN HOUSE, THAMPANKADAVU,**| ||**THALIKULAM, THRISSUR.**| |**2**|**UNNIKRISHNAN,**| ||**AGED 43 YEARS**| ||**S/O. SREEDHARAN, KANNANKORAN HOUSE, THAMPANKADAVU,**| ||**THALIKULAM, THRISSUR.**| |**3**|**MANIKANTAN,**| ||**AGED 37 YEARS**| ||**S/O. SREEDHARAN, KANNANKORAN HOUSE, THAMPANKADAVU,**| ||**THALIKULAM, THRISSUR.**| |**4**|**SIVAPRASAD,**| ||**AGED 33 YEARS**| ||**S/O. SREEDHARAN, KANNANKORAN HOUSE, THAMPANKADAVU,**| ||**THALIKULAM, THRISSUR.**| |**5**|**RIJIL,**| ||**AGED 29 YEARS**| ||**S/O. SIVADAS, KUTTANPARAMBATHU VEEDU,**| ||**THAMPANKADAVU, THALIKULAM, THRISSUR.**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.K.K.RAJEEV**| ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**STATE OF KERALA,**| |---|---| ||**REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF**| ||**KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 031.**| |**2**|**THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,**| _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 4 ## **THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-680001.** **3 ABDUL GAFOOR, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED PUTHIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, GREEN GARDEN, KUTTICHIRA ROAD, KALATHODU, THRISSUR680005.** - **4 SHEMEER, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL GAFOOR, PUTHIYAVEETTIL HOUSE, KUTTICHIRA ROAD, KALATHODU, THRISSUR-680005.** - **5 SUJEESH S., AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. SURESH, KOLLARA VEEDU, AYYAPPANKAVU, VADAKKEKARA, KOORAKANCHERRY, THRISSUR-680005.** **6 ARUN S., AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. SELVAN, AYINIKUNNATH HOUSE, GREEN PARK, MARIADAMOOLA, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR680651.** - **7 SIRAJUDEEN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.SIDHIQUE, PUTHANANGADI HOUSE, JAWAN ROAD, KOORKANCHERRY, THRISSUR-680007.** **R3-7 BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) R3-7 BY ADV. SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) R3-7 BY ADV. SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR R3-7 BY ADV. SRI.S.K.ADHITHYAN R3-7 BY ADV. SRI.SABU PULLAN R3-7 BY ADV. SRI.GOKUL D SUDHAKARAN** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.07.2020, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2320/2020(H), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 5 ## **V.G.ARUN, J.** ## **----------------------------------------------CRL.M.C.Nos. 2320 and 2344 of 2020 ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 29[th] day of July, 2020** ## **O R D E R** Petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2320 of 2020 are the accused in Crime No.244 of 2018 and the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2344 of 2018 are the accused in Crime No. 218 of 2018 of Thrissur Town East Police Station. Crime No.244 of 2018 is registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 323, 326, 249(b) and 149 of IPC and is now pending as C.C.No.104 of 2018 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court-I, Thrissur. Crime No.280 of 2018, for offences under Sections 143, 144, 147, 451, 341, 323 324, 427 and 149 of IPC and is now pending as C.C.No.926 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur. The incident which led to the crimes being registered arose from a dispute regarding the purchase and delivery of fruits at the Vegetable and Fruits Market, Thrissur. The _de facto_ complainant and the other persons injured in Crime No.144 of 2018 are arrayed as respondents 3 and 4 in Crl.M.C 2320 of 2020 and those in Crime No.280 of 2018, as respondents 3 to 7 in Crl.MC.No.2344 of 2020 . The respective respondents have filed affidavits in the cases stating that the dispute, which led to the incident and registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 6 that they have no subsisting grievance in the matter. 2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. 3. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavits filed by the _de facto_ complainant and injured persons in both crimes, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the matter has been amicably settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, there is no possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in _**Madan Mohan**_ _**Abbot v. State of Punjab**_ [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and _**Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another**_ [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief. In the result, this Crl.M.Cs are allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.104 of 2018 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur and the proceedings in C.C.No.926 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur are quashed. Sd/- ## **V.G.ARUN, JUDGE** _vgs_ _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 7 ## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2320/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.3.2018 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGAISTRATE COURT THRISSUR IN CC NO 104/2018** **ANNEXURE 11 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 IN THE PRESENCE OF A NOTARY DATED 20.7.2019** _**CRL.MC.2320 & 2344/2020**_ 8 ## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2344/2020** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15-03-2018 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-1, THRISSUR IN C.C NO. 926/2018** **ANNEXURE II AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY RESPONDENTS 3 TO 7 IN THE PRESENCE OF A NOTARY DATED 23-07-2019**