Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A.
Judgment Date: 2022-11-28
Court Decision / Holding: Crl.M.Cs allowed; Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.1288/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed.
Final Disposition: Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Biju KuriaKose
Eldho Paul
Sajidh P.S
Aneesh N.A
Remya Krishnan R

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor
Badusha N.M.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Thomas J. Annakkallunkal
• Jayaram S. Nirmal Cheriyan
• Vargheese Litty Peter
• Anupa Anna Jose Kandoth
• P. Vijaya Bhanu (Sr.)

Counsels for Respondents

• S. Rajeev
• S. Vinay
• M. S. Aneer
• Sarath K.P.
• Prerith Philip Joseph
• Smt. Sreeja V. (Public Prosecutor)

Case Synopsis & Summary

These Criminal Miscellaneous Cases arise from Crime No.1288 of 2022 registered at Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam. The petitioners, accused Nos. 2 to 5 in Crl.M.C.8537 and the 1st accused in Crl.M.C.8548, seek to quash the FIR under sections 420 and 384 read with 34 IPC, on the ground that a private settlement has been reached with the de facto complainant, a film producer. The prosecution alleges that the 1st accused, with deceit and threats, sought money by entangling the complainant in a film project; obscene photos were sent; two lawyers allegedly advised the complainant to pursue a complaint, and a demand of Rs 3 crore was made, with Rs 10 lakh paid as advance. The affidavits in Annexure-A2 sworn by the de facto complainant assert settlement and no objection to quashing, which the SHO verified as genuine. Learned counsel for the state and the de facto complainant oppose continuing the prosecution beyond the private settlement. The court, invoking Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, exercises its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and all further proceedings, holding that the dispute is private and settlement eliminates public interest in continuing the case. The order reflects a private-dispute resolution justifying quashing of proceedings.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 420 IPCSection 384 read with Section 34 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303
Principle of quashing private disputes under Cr.P.C. Section 482 (inherent power)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that the dispute is private and has been settled; affidavits in Annexure-A2 sworn by the de facto complainant acknowledge the settlement and express no objection to quashing. The SHO has verified the settlement as genuine. Relying on Gian Singh, they urge quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C., arguing that continued prosecution would not serve any useful purpose given the private nature of the dispute.

Contentions of Respondents

The state and the de facto complainant’s counsel acknowledge the settlement but submit that the Court may still examine whether quashing is appropriate. They rely on the settled position that private settlements do not automatically nullify public-interest considerations, and request appropriate scrutiny under 482 Cr.P.C.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another	(2012) 10 SCC 303	Positive	The court relies on Gian Singh to exercise the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings in a private dispute after settlement, as continuing would serve no fruitful purpose.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 1 ## _IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM_ ## _PRESENT_ _THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A._ _MONDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944_ _CRL.MC NO. 8537 OF 2022_ ## _PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 TO 5:_ _1 BIJU KURIAKOSE, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.LATE KURIAKOSE, PARACKAL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM , PIN – 686 611._ _2 ELDHO PAUL, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.LATE FR. M.V PAULOSE, 44/1007, MARANGATTU HOUSE, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM , PIN – 682 025. 3 SAJIDH P.S, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED P.A, PUTHUPARAMBIL, G-A HOLY CREST, SAAB ESTATE, KAKKANAD, OFF RAJEEV GANDHI ROAD, COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE, ERNAKULAM , PIN – 682 037._ _4 ANEESH N.A, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.LATE ANTONY, NELLIPPARAMBU HOUSE, NELLIPPARAMBU LANE, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 025._ _BY ADVS. THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL JAYARAMAN S. NIRMAL CHERIYAN VARGHESE LITTY PETER ANUPA ANNA JOSE KANDOTH P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)(K/421/1984)_ Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 2 ## _RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:_ _1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031._ _2 BADUSHA. N.M, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED V.A, NETTIPPARAMBU VEEDU, COMRADE NAGAR, YMJ ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 025._ _BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV S V.VINAY(K/355/2009) M.S.ANEER(K/644/2013) SARATH K.P.(K/001467/2021) PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH(K/000736/2015)_ _SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR_ _THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON_ _28.11.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.8548/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:_ Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 3 ## _IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM_ ## _PRESENT_ _THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A._ _MONDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944_ ## _CRL.MC NO. 8548 OF 2022_ ## _PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:_ _REMYA KRISHNAN R, D/O RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 32 YEARS, CHARIYANPARAMBIL HOUSE, POICKATTUSSERY, ALUVA, CHENGAMANADU. ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 683 578._ _BY ADVS. M.R.RAJESH SANDHYA E.S._ ## _RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:_ - _1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031._ _2 BADUSHA. N.M, S/O. MUHAMMED V.A, AGED 46 YEARS, NETTIPPARAMBU VEEDU, COMRADE NAGAR, YMJ ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM , PIN – 682 025._ _BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV S V.VINAY(K/355/2009) M.S.ANEER(K/644/2013) SARATH K.P.(K/001467/2021) PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH(K/000736/2015)_ _THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.11.2022, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.8537/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:_ Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 4 ## **O R D E R** These Crl.M.Cs. Are filed by the petitioners in Crime No.1288 of 2022 of Palarivattom Police Station. Crl.M.C.No.8548 of 2022 is filed by the 1[st] accused whereas Crl.M.C.No.8537 of 2022 is filed by the accused Nos.2 to 5. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 420, 384 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. The prosecution case is that, the 1[st] accused with the intention to cheat and extract money from the de facto complainant, a film producer, approached the de facto complainant for discussing a film story. Accordingly after establishing an acquaintance, she frequently contacted him through his mobile phone. During such interaction, the 1[st] accused sent obscene photos to his whatsapp number. Later the de facto complainant was called to the office of the 3[rd] and 4[th] accused who are lawyers, by making him believe that the 1[st] accused has approached them to file a complaint against him and thereby threatened the de facto complainant. It is also alleged that, by making such threats, the accused persons have demanded an amount of Rs.3 crore from him. 3. Under the threat as above, the de facto complainant was forced to enter into an agreement with the accused and was also Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 5 compelled to part with an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- as advance payment. 4. The FIR registered in this case is marked as Annexure-A1 in both the Crl.M.Cs. These Crl.M.Cs are filed in such circumstances, to quash all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1. 5. Heard Sri.P.Vijayabhanu, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.8537 of 2022, Sri.Rajesh M.R., learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.8548 of 2022, Sri.S.Rajeev, learned counsel for the 2[nd] respondent/de facto complainant in both the cases, Smt.Sreeja V., learned Public Prosecutor for the State in Crl.M.C.No.8548 of 2022 and Sri.M.P.Prashanth, learned Public Prosecutor in Crl.M.C.No.8537 of 2022. 6. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been settled. Annexure-A2 affidavit in both the cases, sworn by the 2[nd] respondent/ de facto complainant are filed along with these Crl.M.Cs. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavits, the 2[nd] respondent/ de facto complainant had specifically acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2[nd] respondent/de facto complainant also confirms Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 6 the same. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine. 7. The allegations would reveal that the dispute is purely private in nature. In such circumstances, by applying the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]** , proceedings can be quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This is particularly because, on account of the settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the prosecution to continue. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, and Annexure-A1 FIR submitted in Crime No.1288 of 2022 of Palarivattom Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are hereby quashed. Sd/- **ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE** DG/28.11.22 Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 7 ## _APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8548/2022_ _PETITIONER ANNEXURES_ _Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO. 1288/2022 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM Annexure A2 THE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, BADUSHA N.M DATED 24.11.2022 Annexure A3 A NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE PETITIONER DATED 24.11.2022_ Crl.M.C.No. 8537 & 8548 of 2022 8 ## _APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8537/2022_ _PETITIONER ANNEXURES_ _Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1288/2022 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM_ _Annexure A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT_