High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2021-06-17Quashed.

CRL.M.C.NO.2658 OF 2021

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C.NO.2658 OF 2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: N. Anil Kumar
Judgment Date: 2021-06-17
Court Decision / Holding: This Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in Annexure-B final report in Crime No. 284/2018, Mananthavady Police Station, and the case CC No. 237/2018 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mananthavady, stand quashed.
Final Disposition: Quashed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Albin Sebastian
Viswas P.
Akhil Roy
Pranav.K.
Stephin
Joshva Emanuval Jose
Harikrishna.S.
Hari Suresh
Sheffin Joseph
Austin Edward
Ejas.A.
Samuel Antappan
Nidhin Joseph Raj.I.J.
Elbin K.L.
Belvin Benny
Jobison James

Respondents

The Sub Inspector of Police, Mananthavady Police Station, Wayanad District
State of Kerala represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, Kochi
Devadas V.S.
Sreeraj M.R.
Muhammed Yazir K.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• K. M. Sathyanatha Menon
• Kavery S. Thampi

Counsels for Respondents

• Ajith Murali
• P. Yadhu Kumar

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case arises from Crime No. 284/2018 of Mananthavady Police Station, now pending as CC No. 237/2018 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court‑II, Mananthavady. The petitioners, accused 1 to 16, were chargesheeted under Sections 143, 147, 323 and 341 read with Section 149 IPC for forming an unlawful assembly and causing hurt to the 3rd respondent in front of the Mananthavady Government Hospital on 26 March 2018. The challenge before the High Court is to quash the Annexure-B final report and the ongoing proceedings. The record shows that during the pendency of the case, the disputes between the petitioners and the injured respondents 3 to 5 were amicably settled out of court, with affidavits stating no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing. The court noted that the offences are of a personal nature and that settlement would promote harmonious relations. Relying on a line of decisions, namely Gian Singh v State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh v State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir v State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, and State of M.P. v Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688, the court held that ends of justice warrant quashing. Consequently, the petition is allowed, and all further proceedings in CC 237/2018 are quashed.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 143 IPCSection 147 IPCSection 323 IPCSection 341 IPCSection 149 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Ends of justice; settlement between parties can justify quashing of criminal proceedings (Gian Singh doctrine).
Private settlements can lead to quashing of criminal proceedings where offences are personal in nature.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the disputes with the injured respondents were amicably settled; affidavits filed stating no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing; the offences are personal in nature and the breach of peace is subsisting only between the private parties. Therefore quashing the final report and CC proceedings would serve ends of justice in light of Gian Singh and related decisions, avoiding further deterioration of relations and promoting private settlement.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents, as per the affidavits filed by the injured parties, have no subsisting grievance and do not object to quashing the proceedings, recognising the private settlement as a basis to end the dispute; they rely on the view that such settlements can secure ends of justice in appropriate cases.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab	(2012) 10 SCC 303	Positive	Supports quashing criminal proceedings where there is a settlement; ends of justice can be achieved through compromise.
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another	(2014) 6 SCC 466	Positive	Affirms that settlements with no subsisting grievance can justify quashing when offences are personal.
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another	(2017) 9 SCC 641	Positive	Case law endorses quashing in light of settlement where appropriate.
State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan and others	(2019) 5 SCC 688	Positive	Supports ends-of-justice rationale in quashing criminal proceedings upon settlement.

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.NO.2658 OF 2021 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 N.ANIL KUMAR THURSDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1943 ## CRL.M.C.NO.2658 OF 2021 CC 237/2018 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ## MANANTHAVADY CRIME No.284/2018 OF MANANTHAVADY POLICE STATION ## PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos.1 to 16: - 1 ALBIN SEBASTIAN, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.SEBASTIAN, MENAMKADU HOUSE, PALLITHODU P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 540. 2 VISWAS P., AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN P., PALAKKAPARMBIL HOUSE, KADAMBODE, PANDALLUR, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 521. - 3 AKHIL ROY, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ROY M.C., MYKKOTTUMKARAYIL HOUSE, ALATTIL P.O., THAVINJAL, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 670 644. 4 PRANAV.K., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.PAVITHRAN, PRANAVAM HOUSE, PAVANNOR MOTTA P.O., (WRONGLY SHOWN AS MAYYIL P.O.), KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 602. 5 STEPHIN, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.SEBASTIAN, PULLIYAMPALLY HOUSE, PALLITHODU , CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 540. Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 ..2.. - 6 JOSHVA EMANUVAL JOSE, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.A.A.JOSE, ADIMURI HOUSE, PONOTH ROAD, KALOOR P.O., COCHIN, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 017. - 7 HARIKRISHNA.S., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.SANILKUMAR, KAVUNGAL HOUSE, EDAVANAKKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 502. - 8 HARI SURESH, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.SURESH, UPPOOTINGAL HOUSE, NEERKUNNAM, VANDANAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 005. - 9 SHEFFIN JOSEPH, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH A.J., ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 024. - 10 AUSTIN EDWARD, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.M.EDWARD MATHEW DALE, VNRA 139, ERAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 011. - 11 EJAS.A., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL SALAM, VALIYELITHARAYIL HOUSE, CHAVARA BRIDGE.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 691583. - 12 SAMUEL ANTAPPAN, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.C.J.ANTAPPEN, CHENNATHARA HOUSE, ARTHUNKAL P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688 530. Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 ..3.. - 13 NIDHIN JOSEPH RAJ.I.J., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH RAJ.I.V., ITTIKKUNNATH HOUSE, OCHANTHURUTH P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 508. - 14 ELBIN K.L., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.LEZLY, KANICHUKUNNATH HOUSE, EDAVILANGU P.O., KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 671. - 15 BELVIN BENNY, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.BENNY, AKKAMATTATHIL HOUSE, MAKKIYAD P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 670 731. - 16 JOBISON JAMES, AGED 25 YEARS, - S/O.BENNISON @ BENNY, MADATHIL HOUSE, THARIODE.P.O., KAVUMMANNAM VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673 575. BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SMT.KAVERY.S.THAMPI ## RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT, STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT: - 1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANATHAVADY POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 670 644. - 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031. - 3 DEVADAS.V.S., AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.SANTHOSH KUMAR, THIRUNILATHU HOUSE, EROOR P.O., VYTILLA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 306. Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 ..4.. 4 SREERAJ.M.R., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.M.A.RAJAN, MOOTHEDATHUKUDY HOUSE, MANATTUPARAMBU, NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 509. 5 MUHAMMED YAZIR.K., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.HAMZA, KALAYATH VELUTHEDATH HOUSE, IRUMBUZHI.P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 509. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI R3 TO R5 BY ADV SRI.P.YADHU KUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.06.2021, THE COURT ON 17.06.2021 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** ## **ORDER** This Crl.M.C. is filed seeking to quash Annexure-B final report submitted in Crime No.284/2018 of Mananthavady Police Station, Wayanadu, which is now pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mananthavady as C.C.No.237/2018. 2. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 16 in C.C.No.237/2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mananthavady. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 323 and 341 read with Section 149 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 26.3.2018 at 13.15 hours, in front of the casualty of Mananthavady Government Hospital, the petitioners who are sympathisers of SFI and DYFI formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons blocked the 3[rd] respondent and voluntarily caused hurt to him and thereby committed the aforesaid offences. Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 ..6.. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 5. 5. During the pendency of the case, all the disputes between the petitioners and the injured/respondents 3 to 5 were amicably settled out of court. The injured/respondents 3 to 5 filed separate affidavits before this Court stating that the entire matter is settled between the parties in the presence of mediators. The de facto complainants, who are the respondents 3 to 5 herein, have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners. The injured/respondents 3 to 5 have no objection in quashing the proceedings as the matter is settled between the parties. The offences involved in this case are purely personal in nature. In such a case, this Court is of the view that a settlement between the parties would lead to a better relationship between them and would resolve a private dispute. To secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal proceeding is put to an end in the light of the decisions reported in **Gian Singh** v. **State of Punjab** Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 **==> picture [22 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** [(2012)10 SCC 303], **Narinder Singh and others** v. **State of Punjab and another** [(2014)6 SCC 466], **Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others** v. **State of Gujarat and another** [(2017)9 SCC 641] and **State of M.P.** v. **Laxmi Narayan and others** [(2019)5 SCC 688]. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in Annexure-B final report submitted in Crime No.284/2018 of Mananthavady Police Station, Wayanadu, which is now pending on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mananthavady as C.C.No.237/2018 stand quashed. Sd/- **N.ANIL KUMAR, JUDGE** skj Crl.M.C.No.2658 of 2021 ..8.. ## **APPENDIX** ## PETITIONERS' ANNEXURE Appendix A TRUE COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.284/2018 MANANTHAVADY POLICE STATION. Appendix B CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN C.C.NO.237/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II, MANANTHAVADY. Appendix C AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30/03/2021. Appendix D AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30/03/2021. Appendix E AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 26/03/2021.