Emam Bux @ Emamudeen and others v. Muneer, Jaleena and State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** **FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2014/13TH ASHADHA, 1936** **Crl.MC.No. 2229 of 2014 (F)** **--------------------------------------[C.C.NO.1403/2013 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATECOURT - II, NEDUMANGAD, CRIME NO. 462/2012 OF NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM]** **.............** **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 7: ------------------------------------------------------** **1. EMAM BUX @ EMAMUDEEN, AGED 49, S/O. EDREES, ANDAVAR ARUL HOUSE, KOPPOM, ARASUPARAMBU, NEDUMANGAD .P.O., NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, ARASUPARAMB MURI.** **2. ABDUL SALAM, AGED 52,** - **S/O. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, SHALIMAR BUNGLOW, KOPPAM, NEDUMANGAD .P.O., NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, ARASUPARAMB MURI.** **3. ABDUL RASHEED, AGED 42,** - **S/O. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, AMANATHU VEEDU, KOPPAM, NEDUMANGAD .P.O., NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, ARASUPARAMB MURI.** **4. SAINUDEEN, AGED 51, S/O. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, S.N. MANZIL, KURAKKUDU, KUNNUMPURATH VEEDU, NEDUMANGAD .P.O, NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE.** **5. NAZARUDEEN @ NAZAR, AGED 45, S/O. YOOSUF KUNJU, SHERIN MANZIL, OUTTUKUZHI, AZHICODE.P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK.** **6. ANAZ, AGED 29, S/O. SULAIMAN, VARUVILAKATHU VEEDU, N.M.C 29/126, PERUMALA, PULINCHI, MANCHA.P.O, NEDUMANGAD.** **7. JESEEM, AGED 24, S/O. ABDUL RESHEED, K.R. MANZIL, 10TH STONE, MANCHA.P.O., (KOPPAM SHALIMAR BUNGLOW), NEDUMANGAD.** **BY ADVS.SRI.MANU TOM, SRI.K.UVAISKHAN.** **Prv.** ## **CRL.M.C. NO.2229/2014 - F:** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS & STATE:** **-------------------------------------------------------------** ## **1. MUNEER, AGED 25 YEARS,** - **S/O. ISMAIL, RESIDING AT SULEKHA MANZIL, TC 39/2096, CHALA WARD, ATTAKULANGARA, MANAKKAD VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM-695 122.** ## **2. JALEENA, AGED 48 YEARS,** - **PROPRIETOR-MUMTAS FANCY, W/O. ISMAIL, RESIDING AT SULEKHA MANZIL, TC 39/2096, CHALA WARD, ATTAKULANGARA, MANAKKAD VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM-695 122.** ## **3. STATE OF KERALA,** - **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.** **R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM (NILACKAPPILLIL), R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Prv.** **CRL.M.C. NO.2229/2014 - F:** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:** **ANNEXURE .A. CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. 1403 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II, NEDUMANGAD. ANNEXURE.B. SEALED COPY OF THE AWARD DTD. 9-7-2013 PASSED BY THE LOK ADALATH ORGANISED BY NEDUMANGAD LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE IN O.S. 156 OF 2013 OF THE SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD. ANNEXURE.C. ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT,BEFORE HIS DULY AUTHORIZED COUNSEL. ANNEXURE.D. ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, BEFORE HER DULY AUTHORIZED COUNSEL.** ## **RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL.** ## **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A. TO JUDGE.** **Prv.** ## K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J. -----------------------------------------------------------------Criminal M.C. No.2229 of 2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 4[th] day of July, 2014 ## O R D E R This Crl.M.C is filed by the petitioners, who are accused Nos. 1 to 7 in C.C.No.1403/2013 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangad, to quash the proceedings on the basis of a settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called 'the Code'). 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 7 in C.C.No.1403/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangd, alleging commission of offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 427,188, 457, 380 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was registered on the basis of a complaint given by the second respondent herein against the first petitioner as Crime No.462/2012 of Nedumangad police station and after investigation final report was filed and it was taken Crl.M.C. No.2229 of 2014 2 on file as C.C.No.1403/2013. The second respondent herein is the mother of the defacto complainant and she was cited as 4[th] witness in the memo of evidence produced along with the final report. The second respondent herein filed O.S.No.156/2012 before the Sub Court, Nedumangad, against the petitioners in respect of the incident and the mater has been referred to Lok Adalath and in the Lok Adalath it was settled evidenced by Annexure-B award. In pursuance of the settlement, amounts were paid and the parties have agreed to withdraw the case in view of the settlement. Further, balance amount as per the award have to be paid only after quashing the proceedings. Since, some of the offences are non-compoundable in nature, they cannot withdraw the case or compound the case before the lower court. So they have no other remedy, except to approach this Court, seeking the following relief: “It is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to quash all the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.1403 of 2013 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Nedumangad, pursuant to Annexure-A final Crl.M.C. No.2229 of 2014 3 report.” 3. First respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled in the Adalat along with other disputes pending between the parties and the amount fixed as per the Adalat has been received as well. So he has no objection in quashing the proceedings. Petitioners are the landlords of the first respondent and now the relationship has been restored on account of the settlement. He had filed an affidavit stating these facts. 4. According to the counsel for the petitioner, in view of the settlement, no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case. So he prayed for allowing the application. 5. The application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that, grave offences are included, but there are no other case against them. 6. It is an admitted fact that, the petitioners Crl.M.C. No.2229 of 2014 4 were the owners of the building in which first respondent was occupying as a tenant earlier. There was some dispute arose between the parties, in respect of which civil litigations as well as criminal prosecution have been initiated. On the basis of the statement given by the defacto-complainant/first respondent Crime No. 462/12 of Nedumangad police station was registered against the petitioners, alleging offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 427, 188, 457, 380 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C.1403/2013, which is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nedumangad. The matter was referred to Adalat, in the matter pendency before the Sub Court, from that court in which Annexure-B award was passed and in the settlement, they have decided to withdraw this case as well. Now the entire terms of the award has been fulfilled which is clear from the submissions made by the learned counsel for both parties. First respondent also Crl.M.C. No.2229 of 2014 5 filed an affidavit stating these facts. However, Section 188 of the Indian Penal code is not attracted as no complaint, without sanction of the court under Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for such an offence cannot be taken cognisance of. This is a dispute between the landlords and tenant and the matter has been settled between the parties. This court feels that, it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 can be invoked to quash the proceedings, in view of the dictum laid down in the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012(4) KLT 108 (SC)]** . Further no purpose will be served in proceeding with the case as well because conviction in such cases will be remote and it will only be wastage of judicial time. So the petition is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.1403/2013 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangad, (Crime No.462/2012 of Nedumangad police station), as against the petitioners is quashed. Office is directed to Crl.M.C. No.2229 of 2014 6 communicate this order to the concerned court, immediately. Sd/- **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE** // True Copy// P.A. to Judge ss