Eby and others v. State of Kerala

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 806 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.443/2020 OF VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION, ``` ``` THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.2556 OF 2021 ``` ``` OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS IV (MOBILE), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ``` ``` PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ``` - **`1 EBY AGED 35 YEARS`** - **`S/O MANIKUTTAN, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 71/1771, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`2 JITHIN AGED 34 YEARS`** - **`S/O MANIKUTTAN, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 44/418, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`3 YESUDASAN @ KEELAR AGED 55 YEARS`** - **`S/O MICHAEL, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 44/476, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`4 JOSE AGED 48 YEARS`** - **`S/O THANKAPPAN, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 44/418, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`5 KEVIN AGED 22 YEARS`** Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:2:-_ ``` S/O YESUDASAN, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 44/476, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009 ``` - **`6 SUBHASH`** ``` AGED 41 YEARS ``` ``` S/O MURALI, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 71/1762, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009 ``` - **`7 UMESH`** - **`AGED 24 YEARS`** - **`S/O UNNI, PUTHUVALPURAYIDOM, TC 44/430, ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** ## **`BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN`** ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`3 MARY JOSEPHINE AGED 54 YEARS D/O ROSAMMA, JJ HOUSE, TC 44/418(1), ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`4 IVAN JOHNY AGED 31 YEARS S/O JOHNY, JJ HOUSE, TC 44/418(1), ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`5 JEEVAN JOHNY AGED 27 YEARS`** - **`S/O JOHNY, JJ HOUSE, TC 44/418(1), ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009`** - **`6 SUJITH AGED 45 YEARS`** Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:3:-_ ``` S/O VINCENT, SUNITHA COTTAGE, TC 44/419(1), ST.XAVIERS NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, BEEMA PALLI, MUTTATHARA WARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695009 BY ADV NEETHU S. ``` ``` SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEMA T.V. ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:4:-_ Dated this the 12[th] day of March, 2024 ## **O R D E R** The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, to quash Annexure-1 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. No.2556/2021 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 7 in Crime No.443/2020 of the Valiyathura Police Station, registered against them, at the instance of the third respondent, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 323, 354, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code,1860. 3. The crux of the prosecution case is that: on 22.3.2020, at around 23.45 hours, the accused in furtherance of their common intention and out of their Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:5:-_ previous animosity, assaulted the respondents 3 to 5, the 4[th] accused assaulted the 3[rd] respondent, and the 3[rd] accused hit on the back and neck of the 3[rd] respondent, and further, the accused 4 and 5 abused the 6[th] respondent. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 4. Heard; Sri. Latheesh Sebastian, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Neema T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.Neethu S., the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 to 6. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioners and the respondents 3 to 6 has been amicably settled out of court and the said respondents have executed Annexures A2 to A5 affidavits stating that they have no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners and have no objection in the proceedings Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:6:-_ being quashed. Hence, the petition may be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Investigating Officer has ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the respondents 3 to 6 have voluntarily executed Annexures A2 to A5 affidavits. 7. The learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 6 also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the said respondents have no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners. The said submission is recorded. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Gian Singh vs.** **State of Punjab** [2012 (10) SCC 303] and **Prabatbhai** **Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and another** [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that in the facts and circumstances of the case and to secure the ends of justice, where the _-:7:-_ Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 High Court is satisfied that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and the offence is not serious in nature involving mental depravity, criminal proceedings may be quashed. 9. On a consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials on record, especially after going through Annexures 2 to 5 affidavits sworn in by the respondents 3 to 6, which has been found to be genuine and bona fide by the Investigating Officer, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court, particularly since the alleged offences are not serious in nature, no public interest is involved, the chances of conviction is remote, the continuation of the proceeding would only be wastage of judicial time and the settlement would augur harmony in the society. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition. In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:8:-_ Annexure-1 Final Report in Crime No.443/2020 of Valiyathura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram and all further proceedings in C.C.No.2556/2021 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV, Thiruvananthapuram, as against the petitioners. The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly. SD/- **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** rmm/12/3/2024 Crl.M.C.No.806 of 2024 _-:9:-_ ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 806/2024`** |**`PETITIONER`**|**`ANNEXURES`**| |---|---| |**`Annexure 1`**|**`CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT OF`**| ||**`THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO 443/2020`**| ||**`OF VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION`**| |**`Annexure 2`**|**`ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY`**| ||**`THE 3RD RESPONDENT`**| |**`Annexure 3`**|**`ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY`**| ||**`THE 4TH RESPONDENT`**| |**`Annexure 4`**|**`ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY`**| ||**`THE 5TH RESPONDENT`**| |**`Annexure 5`**|**`ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY`**| ||**`THE 6TH RESPONDENT`**|