High Court of KeralaSingle JudgePetitions allowed; FIRs and proceedings quashed...
Crl.MC Nos.2529 & 2537/2021 (Criminal Misc. Cases)
Case / Petition Number:Crl.MC Nos.2529/2021 (E) & 2537/2021 (F)
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Gopinath P.
- Judgment Date
- 2021-05-04
- Court Decision / Holding
- Crl.MC Nos.2529 of 2021 and 2537 of 2021 allowed. Annexure I FIR in Crime No.206/2021 and Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.205/2021, and all further proceedings thereon shall stand quashed as against the petitioners in respective petitions. Both petitions disposed of accordingly.
- Final Disposition
- Petitions allowed; FIRs and proceedings quashed; matter disposed in the ends of justice.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Sarun C.
- Sooraj C.
- Dhinup K.
- Biju C.
- Amaljith K @ Amal
- Abhijith K.
- Vishnu V.K.
- Vivek V.K.
- Vijil V.K.
- Jithin E.
Respondents
- State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
- Vijil V.K.
- Amaljith K. @ Amal
- Sarun C.
- Sooraj C.
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • A. Arunkumar
Counsels for Respondents
- • Vipin T Jose
- • T.R Renjith (Public Prosecutor)
Case Synopsis & Summary
Two connected Criminal Misc. Cases, Crl.MC Nos.2529/2021 and 2537/2021, were heard by a Single Judge of the Kerala High Court on 4 May 2021. The petitioners-accused in Crime Nos.206/2021 and 205/2021 of Chandera Police Station, Kasaragod, sought quashing of the offences under IPC sections 341 and 323 r/w 34 (2529) and sections 143, 147, 341, 323 r/w 149 (2537) and the corresponding proceedings under CrPC. The core contention is that the disputes between the petitioners and the defacto complainants (respondents 2 and 3 in 2529; respondents 2 and 3 in 2537) have been amicably settled, as evidenced by Annexures II and III (affidavits). The petitioners rely on Supreme Court precedents Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat to invoke the court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC in the ends-of-justice interest, seeking quashing of FIRs and ongoing proceedings. The court, considering the affidavits and the authorities cited, held that the inherent power can be invoked, and consequently allowed both petitions, quashing the FIRs and all further proceedings insofar as the petitioners are concerned, thereby disposing of the cases in the interests of justice.
Provisions of Law Cited
IPC sections 341 and 323 read with Section 34IPC sections 143, 147, 341, 323 read with Section 149Section 482 CrPC (inherent powers)
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Ends of justice
- Inherent powers of High Court under CrPC 482 to quash proceedings
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners contend that the disputes with respondents 2 and 3 have been amicably settled. Annexures II and III contain affidavits from the defacto complainants and the guardian of the minor confirming that they do not intend to prosecute. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, they urge the High Court to exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIRs (Crime Nos. 206/2021 and 205/2021) and terminate further proceedings in the ends-of-justice interest.
Contentions of Respondents
No explicit separate submissions from respondents are recorded; the respondents’ position is reflected in the affidavits of amicable settlement (Annexures II–III) and in the court’s reliance on established precedents to exercise inherent jurisdiction.
Cited Precedents (2)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another | 2012 (4) KLT 108 | Positive | Court relied on Gian Singh to exercise inherent jurisdiction under CrPC 482 in the ends-of-justice context. |
| Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat | (2017) 9 SCC 641 | Positive | Court cited Parbatbhai Aahir for upholding the use of inherent powers to secure ends of justice in amicable settlement scenarios. |
Diagnostic Tool
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.MC Nos.2529 & 2537/2021 (Criminal Misc. Cases) 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.**
**TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1943**
**Crl.MC.No.2529 OF 2021(E)**
**[CRIME NO.206/2021 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD]**
## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:**
- **1 SARUN C., AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. SAROJINI, R/AT CHIRAMMAL HOUSE, KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **2 SOORAJ.C., AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. SAROJINI, R/AT CHIRAMMAL HOUSE, KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **3 DHINUP.K., AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANAN.M., R/AT KANNAIKAI, THURUTHI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **4 BIJU.C., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. MADHAVAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
**BY ADV. SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
- **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.**
- **2 VIJIL V.K., AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **3 AMALJITH K. @ AMAL, AGED 16 YEARS,S/O. JAYAN.V., R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT,**
**Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-2-**
**MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN FATHER JAYAN.V, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. KUNHAMBU, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
**BY ADVS. SRI.VIPIN T JOSE, R2, R3 SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PP**
**THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.05.2021 ALONG WITH CRL.M.C.NO.2537 OF 2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:**
**Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-3-**
**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.**
**TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1943**
**Crl.MC.No.2537 OF 2021(F)**
**[CRIME NO.205/2021 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD]**
## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:**
- **1 AMALJITH K @ AMAL, AGED 16 YEARSA, S/O. JAYAN.V. R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN FATHER JAYAN.V, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. KUNHAMBU, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **2 ABHIJITH K., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. SASIDHARAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **3 VISHNU V.K., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. VISHWAMBHARAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **4 VIVEK V.K., AGED 18 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **5 VIJIL V.K., AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
- **6 JITHIN E., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. PRABHAKARAN, R/AT KANNAIKAI, CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**
## **BY ADV. SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR**
**Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-4-**
## **RESPONDENTS:**
|**1**|**STATE OF KERALA,**|
|---|---|
||**REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,**|
||**HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.**|
|**2**|**SARUN.C, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. SAROJINI,**|
||**R/AT CHIRAMMAL HOUSE, KANNAIKAI,**|
||**CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK,**|
||**KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**|
|**3**|**SOORAJ.C, AGED 26 YEARS,**|
||**S/O. SAROJINI,**|
||**R/AT CHIRAMMAL HOUSE, KANNAIKAI,**|
||**CHERUVATHUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK,**|
||**KASARAGOD DISTRICT.**|
||**BY ADVS. SRI.VIPIN T JOSE, R2 AND R3**|
||**SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PP**|
**THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.05.2021 ALONG WITH CRL.M.C.NO.2529 OF 2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:**
**Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-5-**
## **ORDER**
**[Crl.MC.No.2529/2021, Crl.MC.No.2537/2021]**
## **Dated this the 4th day of May 2021**
The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2529 of 2021 are
the accused in crime No.206 of 2021 of Chandera Police Station, Kasaragod District, alleging commission of offences punishable under sections 341 and 323 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. The crime came to be registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the 2[nd]
respondent/defacto complainant. The allegation against the petitioners is that on account of previous enmity, the petitioners wrongfully
restrained the defacto complainant and his friend, the 3[rd] respondent and beat them up and thereby
committed the alleged offences.
## **Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-6-**
3. It is submitted, with reference to
Annexures II and III affidavits, that the entire disputes between the petitioners and respondents 2
and 3 are settled amicably.
4. A perusal of Annexures II and III show
that both the defacto complainant and his friend who was the other victim have settled their disputes amicably with the petitioners and that they do not intend to proceed with the
prosecution.
5. In the totality of the facts and
circumstances of the case and taking into consideration of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another** [2012 (4) KLT 108] **and Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat** [(2017) 9 SCC 641], I am of the
opinion that this is a case where the inherent
jurisdiction of this Court can be exercised in order to secure the ends of justice.
## **Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-7-**
6. In the connected case, namely
Crl.M.C.No.2537 of 2021, the respondents/defacto complainants in Crl.M.C.No.2529 of 2021 together with four others are the petitioners. Petitioners
1 and 2 in Crl.M.C.No.2529 of 2021 are respondents 2 and 3 in Crl.M.C.No.2537 of 2021.
7. The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2537 of
2021 are accused in Crime No.205 of 2021 of
Chandera Police Station, Kasaragod, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections
143, 147, 341, 323 r/w Section 149 of the IPC.
8. The crime was registered on the basis of
**==> picture [426 x 77] intentionally omitted <==**
respondents have executed separate affidavits, which are produced as Annexures AII and AIII,
## **Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-8-**
stating that all disputes with the petitioners had been settled and that they do not intend to prosecute the case further.
9. Taking into account the overall facts and
circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the decisions referred to above, I am of the opinion
that this is also a case where inherent power of this Court under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code can be invoked.
10. Accordingly, Crl.M.C.Nos.2529 of 2021 and
2537 of 2021 will stand allowed. Annexure I FIR in crime No.206 of 2021 of Chandera Police Station,
Kasaragod and all further proceedings thereon will
stand quashed as against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No. 2529 of 2021.
Similarly, Annexure AI FIR in crime No.205 of
2021 of Chandera Police Station, Kasaragod and all
## **Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-9-**
further proceedings thereon shall stand quashed as against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2537 of 2021.
Both the Crl.M.C.Nos.2529 of 2021 and 2537 of
2021 will stand disposed of, accordingly.
**Sd/GOPINATH P. JUDGE**
**akv**
**Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-10-**
## **APPENDIX IN CRL.M.C.NO.2529 OF 2021**
**PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:**
**ANNEXURE-AI A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.206 OF 2021 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION**
**ANNEXURE-AII A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT**
**ANNEXURE-AIII**
**A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE FATHER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT**
**Crl.MC.Nos.2529 & 2537/2021**
**-11-**
## **APPENDIX IN CRL.M.C.NO.2537 OF 2021**
**PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:**
**ANNEXURE A1**
**A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO. 205 OF 2021 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION.**
**ANNEXURE AII A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.**
**ANNEXURE AIII A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.**