Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeQuashed

CRL.M.C. Nos. 7744 of 2023 and 7875 of 2023: Dileep Devasia & Others v. State of Kerala & Others; Ragesh Raj & Others v. State of Kerala & Others

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C. No. 7744 of 2023; CRL.M.C. No. 7875 of 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Gopinath P.
Judgment Date
2023-10-09
Court Decision / Holding
The petitions are allowed; all further proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.7744/2023 (C.C.297/2017) and Crl.M.C.No.7875/2023 (C.C.558/2017) stand quashed; the matter stands closed in Kakkanad JFCM.
Final Disposition
Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • DILEEP DEVASIA
  • SREEJITH K.R.
  • ROSAMMA DEVASIA
  • SREEJA DILEEP
  • RAGESH RAJ
  • HIMA
  • SHANKARAN
  • GIRIJA

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor
  • GIRIJA
  • SANKARAN
  • RAKESH RAJ
  • SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THADIYITTAPARAMBU POLICE STATION
  • ROSAMMA DEVASIA
  • DILEEP DEVASIA
  • SREEJA DILEEP

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • BIJU GEORGE (VADASSERY)
  • • S. JIJI
  • • Jaison Joseph
  • • M.N. SANJITH, SC, NARAKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
  • • Jimmy Joseph
  • • Archana Raman
  • • Veena Vallikantan

Counsels for Respondents

  • • BIJU GEORGE (VADASSERY)
  • • G. SUDHEER (PP)

Case Synopsis & Summary

Two Criminal Misc. Cases (CRL.M.C. Nos. 7744 of 2023 and 7875 of 2023) were heard by the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam for quashing criminal proceedings arising from two separate regimes: Crime No.1086/2016 (CC 297/2017) and Crime No.1085/2016 (CC 558/2017) of Thadiyittaparambu Police Station. The petitioners in 7744/2023 are Dileep Devasia, Sreejith K.R., Rosamma Devasia, and Sreeja Dileep; the petitioners in 7875/2023 are Ragesh Raj, Hima, ShankarAn, and Girija. The respondents include the State of Kerala (through the Public Prosecutor) and the individual complainants/injured persons, along with the Sub Inspector in the second case and others. In both matters, the petitioners contend that the disputes with the defacto complainants have been settled, supported by affidavits, and that further prosecution is not in the public interest given the non-heinous nature of the offences. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and State of MP v. Laxmi Narayan, the Court held that quashing is permissible on the basis of settlements where public interest is not served by continued prosecution. After hearing the Public Prosecutor, the Court quashed proceedings in CC No.297/2017 and CC No.558/2017, on Kakkanad, noting minimal chances of successful prosecution and absence of public interest in continuation. Judge: Gopinath P.

Provisions of Law Cited

IPC Sections 323, 324, 447 read with Section 34IPC Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 427, 447, 354 and 34

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 — quashing of criminal proceedings on settlement; public interest not served by continuation.
  • State of MP v. Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688 — settlement-based quashing; public interest considerations and non-public-interest offences.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submitted that all disputes with the defacto complainants have been settled; affidavits to that effect were filed. They contended that continuing with the prosecution would not serve public interests and that these are not heinous offences; hence, the proceedings should be quashed under the settled-law principles in Gian Singh and Laxmi Narayan.

Contentions of Respondents

Public Prosecutor's position is not elaborated in the judgment excerpt; the court heard the Public Prosecutor and relied on the settlements to exercise its quasi-judicial power to quash, emphasizing lack of public interest in continuing the proceedings.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab2012 (10) SCC 303PositiveCited as the controlling principle that settlement with the complainant can justify quashing the criminal proceedings when public interest requires.
State of MP v. Laxmi Narayan2019 (5) SCC 688PositiveCited to reinforce the settlement-based quashing doctrine and public-interest considerations.

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. 7744 of 2023 and 7875 of 2023: Dileep Devasia & Others v. State of Kerala & Others; Ragesh Raj & Others v. State of Kerala & Others 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 GOPINATH P. ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 17TH ASWINA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 7744 OF 2023 ``` ``` CC 297/2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD CRIME NO.1086/2016 OF THADIYITTAPARAMBU POLICE STATION ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :`** ``` 1DILEEP DEVASIA AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.DEVASSIA, THOOMBUNKAL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH P.O., PUKKATTUPADY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683561 2SREEJITH K.R. AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.RAMU, KAKKANAT HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH P.O., PUKKATTUPADY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683561 3ROSAMMA DEVASIA AGED 65 YEARS, W/O.DEVASSIA, THOOMBUNKAL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH P.O., PUKKATTUPADY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683561 4SREEJA DILEEP AGED 39 YEARS THOOMBUNKAL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH P.O., PUKKATTUPADY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683561 BY ADVS. BIJU GEORGE (VADASSERY) S.JIJI ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED :`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, HIGH COURT P.O, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 ``` Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 2 ``` 2GIRIJA AGED 56 YEARS, W/O.SANKARAN, MEMATTATHIL HOUSE,SHAPPUMPADI, MALAYIDAMTHURUTHU KARA, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 3SANKARAN AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.PARAMESWARAN, MEMATTATHIL HOUSE, SHAPPUMPADI, MALAYIDAMTHURUTHU KARA, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 4RAKESH RAJ, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, KACHANPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAITHARAM BHAGAM, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` G. SUDHEER (PP) SRI.JAISON JOSEPH ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.7875/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 3 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 17TH ASWINA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 7875 OF 2023 ``` ``` CC 558/2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD CRIME NO.1085/2016 OF THADIYITTAPARAMBU POLICE STATION ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4 :`** ``` 1RAGESH RAJ AGED 37 YEARS S/O RAJAN, KACHANPARAMBIL HOUSE, (RAJ NIVAS), KAITHARAM, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683519 2HIMA AGED 32 YEARS W/O. RAGESH RAJ KACHANPARAMBIL HOUSE, (RAJ NIVAS), KAITHARAM, KOTTUVALLY VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683519 3SHANKARAN AGED 65 YEARS S/O PARAMESHWARAN MEMATTATHIL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH PO KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683561 4GIRIJA AGED 56 YEARS W/O SHANKARAN, MEMATTATHIL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH PO KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683561 BY ADVS. JAISON JOSEPH SHRI.M.N.SANJITH, SC, NARAKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT JIMMY JOSEPH ARCHANA RAMANAN VEENA VALLIKANTHAN ``` Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 4 ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE :`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THADIYITTAPARAMBU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683105 3ROSAMMA DEVASIA AGED 65 YEARS W/O DEVASIA, THOOMBUNKAL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH PO, PUKKATTUPADY KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683561 4DILEEP DEVASIA AGED 41 YEARS S/O DEVASIA, THOOMBUNKAL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH PO, PUKKATTUPADY KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683561 5SREEJA DILEEP AGED 39 YEARS W/O DILEEP DEVASIA THOOMBUNKAL HOUSE, MALAYIDAMTHURUTH PO, PUKKATTUPADY KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN- 683561 BY ADV BIJU GEORGE (VADASSERY) SRI.G.SUDHEER, (PP) ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.7744/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 5 ## **O R D E R** The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.7744 of 2023 are the accused in Crime No.1086 of 2016 of Thadiyittaparambu Police Station, which is now pending as C.C.No.297 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad. The petitioners face prosecution alleging commission of offences under Sections 323, 324 and 447 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The crime was registered on the complaint of the 2[nd] respondent in this case (defacto complainant). (4[th] petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.7875 of 2023) 2. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 in Crl.M.C.No.7744 of 2023 are the petitioners 4, 3 and 1 in Crl.M.C.No.7875 of 2023. They along with the second petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.7875 of 2023are the accused in Crime No.1085 of 2016 of Thadiyittaparambu Police Station, alleging commission of offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 427, 447, 354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The matter is now pending as C.C.No.558 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad. The crime was registered on the Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 6 basis of the complaint filed by the 3[rd] respondent in this case (3[rd] petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.7744 of 2023) 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in these cases would submit that all issues between the petitioners and the respective defacto complainants have been settled. Reference is made in this regard to the affidavits filed in this Court and annexed to the respective petitions. It is submitted that no public interest would be served by continuing with the proceedings and the proceedings against the petitioners in the respective cases can be quashed on the basis of settlement. 4. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. 5. Keeping in mind the law laid down by the Supreme Court in _**Gian Singh v. State of Punjab;** (2012) 10 SCC 303_ and _**State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan**_ ; _(2019) 5 SCC 688_ , I am of the view that the proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed on the ground of settlement. No public purpose would be served by continuing with the proceedings in C.C.No.297 of 2017 and C.C.No.558 of 2017 both on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad. The chances of a successful prosecution are also Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 7 minimal in the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The offences alleged are not heinous or offences that can be classified as offences against the society in general. In the result, these petitions are allowed and all further proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.7744 of 2023 in C.C.No.297 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad and all further proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.7875 of 2023 in C.C.No.558 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad will stand quashed. Sd/- ## **GOPINATH P., JUDGE** rkj Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 8 ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7744/2023`** |`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`|`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`| |---|---| |`Annexure A-1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED`| ||`BEFORE THE JFCM COURT, KAKKANAD IN CR.`| ||`NO. 1086/2016 OF THADIYITTAPARAMBU POLICE`| ||`STATION`| |`Annexure A-2`|`THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 03-08-2023 SWORN BY`| ||`THE 2ND RESPONDENT`| |`Annexure A-3`|`THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 03-08-2023 SWORN BY`| ||`THE 3RD RESPONDENT`| |`Annexure A-4`|`THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 03-08-2023 SWORN BY`| ||`THE 4TH RESPONDENT`| Crl.M.C.Nos.7744 and 7875 of 2023 9 ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7875/2023`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` Annexure A1THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/ CHARGE SHEET IN C.C. NO. 558 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD ARISING FROM CRIME NO. 1085 OF 2016 OF THADIYITTAPARAMBU POLICE STATION. Annexure A2THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.3. Annexure A3THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.4 Annexure A4THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.5 ```