Crl.M.C.No. 8783 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938 Crl.MC.No. 8783 of 2016 () --------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1356/2015 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KALADY DATED CRIME NO. 1450/2015 OF KALADY POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 8:: --------------------------------- 1. PRADEEP AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, MARADAN (H) NETTINAMPILLY KARA, KALADY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. VIPIN AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KALARIKKAL (H), PARAPURAM KARA, KANJOOR KIZHAKKUM BHAGAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DIST. 3. RIJO AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.ROCKY, CHAKRAMPILLY(H), KOTTAMADOM KARA, KALADY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DIST. 4. BOSE AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.SUKUMARAN, CHELLAYAZHATH PARAMBIL (H), NEELESWARAM KARA, KALADY VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DIST. 5. SATHEESH AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.SALIM, KAVUNGATHARAYIL (H), SREEMOOLANAGARAM KARA, KANJOOR VADAKKUM BHAGAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DIST. 6. JOMON AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.UNNI, PALLIYANA (H), AYYAMPUZHA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. SHAFEEK AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ABU, MUNDEMPALLY(H), SREEMOOLANAGARAM, CHOWARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 8. ABHIJITH AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYAN, KANJOOPARAMBIL (H), PARAPURAMKARA, KANJOOR KIZHAKKUMBHAGAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN SRI.AKHIL S.VISHNU RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT:: --------------------------------1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALADY POLICE STATION, WHO IS REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031. CONTD.... :2: Crl.MC.No. 8783 of 2016 () --------------------------- 2. VIPINDAS AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, RESIDING AT THALAMUTHA (H), SREEMOOLANAGARAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, 683561. 3. NELSON AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.PAPPACHAN, PULICKA (H), CHOWARA P.O., MANAKKAPADY, CHOWARA THEKKUMBHAGAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683561. 4. LINTO AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.ANTU, PALLAM (H), THRIKKANIKKAVU, CHOWARA THEKKUMBHAGOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, 683561. R2-4 BY ADV. SMT.V.SREEJA R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CONTD... ## :3: Crl.MC.No. 8783 of 2016 () --------------------------- ## APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------ANNEXURE-1: CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.1356/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KALADY. ANNEXURE-2: AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE-3: AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE-4: AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE SKS ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J ----------------------------------------** ## **Crl.M.C. No. 8783 of 2016** ## **----------------------------------------Dated this the 20[th] day of December, 2016** ## **O R D E R** - 1.This petition is filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( hereinafter referred to as the Code ) with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings. - 2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 8 in C.C. No. 1356 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kalady. In the aforesaid case, they face indictment under Section 143, 147, 283, 323 r/w Section 149 of the IPC. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that on 22.05.2015 at 5.30 pm, the petitioners herein formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, wrongfully restrained the respondents 2 to 4 and thereafter assaulted them causing injuries. - 4.Heard the submissions advanced. Crl. M.C. No. 8783 of 2016 2 - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavits filed by them to buttress his submission . It is urged that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquility . Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony. - 6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported against the petitioners. - 7.I have considered the submissions . ## 8.In **Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303** Crl. M.C. No. 8783 of 2016 3 Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows : _“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”_ 9.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court ## in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC** **466,** the pertinent observations which are as under: ## _XXXXXXXXXXXX_ _29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal_ Crl. M.C. No. 8783 of 2016 4 _proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:_ _(i) ends of justice, or_ _(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives._ _xxxxxxx_ _xxxxxxx_ 10.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society .It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise , persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak. 11.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of Crl. M.C. No. 8783 of 2016 5 the Code to quash the proceedings. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as C.C. No. 1356 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kalady are quashed. **Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE** SKS //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE