Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 27TH ASWINA, 1945** **CRL.MC NO. 5551 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 9:** 1 ABDUL SAKEER ALI, AGED 35 YEARS SON OF ABOOBACKER, AKKAPARAMBIL VEEDU, CHERUMUNDASSERY, AMBALAPPARA, PALAKKAD, PIN - 679104 2 SANEESHKUMAR, AGED 35 YEARS SON OF SATHYAN, THOTTAKKULANGARAVEEDU, CHUNANGAD, AMBALAPPARA,PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679511 3 MITHUN, AGED 29 YEARS SON OF RAMACHANDRAN, KOTTEKKATTILVEEDU, 4TH MILE, VARODE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679102 4 SHAREEF P.P., AGED 43 YEARS SON OF MOIDU, PUTHENPEEDIYEKKAL, VARODE P.O., OTTAPALAM VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679102 5 PRAKASAN, AGED 53 YEARS SON OF MADHAVAN, MADASSERY HOUSE, PALAPPURAM P.O., OTTAPALAM VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679102 6 PRAMOD, AGED 38 YEARS SON OF KRISHNANKUTTY, KANJIRAMKATTIL HOUSE, VARODE P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679102 7 VIJAYARAGHAVAN, AGED 58 YEARS SON OF SHIVARAMA PANICKER, MELUVEETTIL KALARIKKAL, AMBALAPPARA P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679511 8 RAVIKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS SON OF PONNAN, CHEPPILATHOTTIL HOUSE, AMBALAPPARA P.O., Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 2 OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679511 9 AJEESH, AGED 35 YEARS SON OF CHANDRAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL, CHUNANGAD POST, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679511 BY ADVS. P.M.ZIRAJ IRFAN ZIRAJ ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 682031 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT – 679 101 3 ASHOKAN, AGED 38 YEARS SON OF MANI, PANGULAM HOUSE, MELARKODE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678703 4 REGHUNATHAN, AGED 45 YEARS SON OF CHANDRAN, MANAGER, BEST READY MIX, RESIDING AT KANNOLY HOUSE, URAKOM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680562 SMT.SREEJA.V, PP, SRI.ABHIJITH.P.A FOR RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 3 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** **------------------------------** **Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023** **---------------------------------------------Dated this the 19[th] day of October, 2023** ## **ORDER** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.406/2023 of Ottapalam Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 343, 323, 294(b), 506, 427 r/w 149 IPC and Section 3 and 5 of the Kerala Prevention of Damage to Private Properties and Payment of Compensation Act, 2019. 3. The prosecution case is that the accused Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 4 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and used filthy languages and assaulted the victim. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavits filed by the victims in support of his contention. The counsel appearing for the victims also submitted that the matter is settled and the victims have no objection in quashing the prosecution and the amount deposited at the time of granting bail can be released to the petitioners. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on the basis of the settlement. But the Public Prosecutor conceded that the matter is settled between the parties. 6. This Court has considered the submission of Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 5 the petitioners, victims and the Public Prosecutor and has also gone through the records including the affidavits filed by the victims. 7. In **State of Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan and Others (2019 (5) SCC 688),** three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The apex court in _**Laxmi Narayan**_ 's case (supra) also relied on the law laid down in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (2012 (10) SCC 303)** and **Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another (2014 (6) SCC 466)** . The apex court in paragraph 13 of the _**Laxmi Narayan**_ 's case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted hereunder: _“13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein_ Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 6 _above, it is observed and held as under:_ _i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non - compoundable offences under S.320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;_ _ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;_ _iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;_ _iv) offences under S.307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of S.307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of S.307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under S.307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open_ Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 7 _to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital / delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above;_ _v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of noncompoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement / compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.”_ 8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the apex court, this court perused the facts in this case and also perused the documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire facts and circumstances I am of the considered opinion that the dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be 8 Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 accepted. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.406/2023 of Ottapalam Police Station are quashed. The amount, if any, deposited by the petitioners as per the bail order will be disbursed to the petitioners. Sd/- DM **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** Crl.M.C.No.5551 of 2023 9 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5551/2023** ## PETITIONER ANNEXURES |ANNEXURE -1|TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION| |---|---| ||REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE SECOND| ||RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO. 406/2023 OF| ||OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION| |ANNEXURE- 2|ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED| ||22.6.2023 SWORN BY THE THIRD| ||RESPONDENT IS PRODUCED| |ANNEXURE- 3|ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED| ||22.6.2023 SWORN BY THE FOURTH| ||RESPONDENT| RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE