CRL.M.C Nos. 5900 & 5904 of 2023 (Surendran v. State of Kerala; Jayaprakasan & Sajeesh v. State of Kerala)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 5TH ASWINA, 1945** **CRL.MC NO. 5900 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** SURENDRAN AGED 26 YEARS PENGATTU, PANGHATTE HOUSE, ARIMBUR DESOM, PARAKKAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680620 BY ADV B.SABITHA (DESOM) ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680641 3 JAYAPRAKASAN AGED 55, S/O KUTTAN, ERAVATH HOUSE, UDAYA NAGAR, ARIMBUR,PARAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680620 BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR JAYAPRAKASAN(Party-In-Person) SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ N.R., PP SRI.SAIJO HASSAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.09.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.5904/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 2 Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 # **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 5TH ASWINA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 5904 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:** 1 JAYAPRAKASAN AGED 40 YEARS ERAVATH HOUSE, UDAYANAGAR, ARIMBUR, PARAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680620 2 SAJEESH C.G AGED 40 YEARS S/O GANGADHARAN, CHENDRA HOUSE, VELUTHUR,P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680012 BY ADVS. SAIJO HASSAN BENOJ C AUGUSTIN RAFEEK V.K AATHIRA SUNNY BINCY JOB ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 **==> picture [6 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** DISTRICT, PIN - 680641 3 SURENDRAN AGED 26, S/O NARAYANA MENON,PENGATTU, PANGHATTE HOUSE, ARIMBUR DESOM, PARAKKAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680620 BY ADVS. SRI.HRITHWICK C.S., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SURENDRAN(PARTY-IN-PERSON) B.SABITHA (DESOM) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.09.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.5900/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 4 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** **-----------------------------Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 27[th] day of September, 2023** ## **ORDER** These Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. These Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these cases by a common order. 3. Crl.M.C.No.5900/2023 is filed to quash all further proceedings in Crime No.399/2023 of Anthikad Police Station. Crl.M.C.No.5904/2023 is filed to quash all further proceedings in Crime Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 5 No.402/2023 of Anthikad Police Station. It is submitted that, these are case and counter case and the matter is settled. 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 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. It is also submitted by the Public Prosecutor that the Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 6 final report is filed in this case. 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 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**_ Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 7 ## _**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 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_ Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 8 _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 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 Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 9 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, these Criminal Miscellaneous case are allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.5900/2023 in Crime No.399/2023 of Anthikad Police Station and all further proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.5904/2023 in Crime No.402/2023 of Anthikad Police Station are quashed. Sd/- DM **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 10 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5904/2023** PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE1 TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME NO. 402/2023 OF ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 07.04.2023 ANNEXURE 2 NOTARISED COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED18.07.2023 Crl.M.C.Nos.5900 & 5904 of 2023 11 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5900/2023** PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 399/2023 OF ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 06.04.2023 ANNEXUREA2 NOTARISED COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 18.07.2023 IN CRIME NO. 399/2023 OF ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SPECIAL JUDGE, SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT CASES THRISSUR IN C.M.P NO. 136/2023 DATED 23.06.2023 IN CRIME NO. 399/2023 OF ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE