Ephraim George Mampilly v. State of Kerala and Abdul Rahim

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** ## **THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2014/30TH SRAVANA, 1936** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3902 of 2014** **----------------------------------** **CC 3900/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO. 1544/2010 OF ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM -------------** **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **----------------------------------** **EPHRAIM GEORGE MAMPILLY, AGED 48 YEARS, MAMPILLY BUILDINGS, (SOUTH SIDE) BROADWAY, KOCHI-31.** **BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** **--------------------------------------------------------------------------** ## **1. STATE OF KERALA,** **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** ## **2. ABDUL RAHIM, AGED 47 YEARS,** **S/O MUHAMMED, KOLUDE HOUSE, CHANDIROOR KARA, AROOR VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK.** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.HYMA R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.UDAYAN** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **PJ** **Crl.MC.No. 3902 of 2014** **---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES** **-----------------------------------------** ## **ANNEXURE A1: THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME 1544/2010 OF CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.** **ANNEXURE A2: THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE IN CC3900/2010 IN THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTGRATE COURT II, ERNAKULAM.** **ANNEXURE A3: AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 7/7/14 WITH ITS TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION** **ANNEXURE A: AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER, DHANALAKSHMI BANK, ERNAKULAM** ## **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES** **--------------------------------------------** **NIL.** **/ TRUE COPY /** **P.S. TO JUDGE** **PJ** ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.** ................................................. Crl.M.C.No.3902 of 2014 .................................................. Dated this the 21[st] day of August, 2014. ## **O R D E R** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.C.3900/2010 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam to quash the proceedings on the basis of the settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner has been arrayed as the sole accused in Crime No.1544/2010 pending before Ernakulam Central Police Station registered on the basis of a statement given by the second respondent as defacto complainant alleging offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 447,427 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C.No.3900/2010 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam. Now the matter has been settled between the parties. On account of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction. Since some of the offences alleged are compoundable in nature, they could not file application for compounding before the court below. So the petitioner has no 2 Crl.M.C.No.3902 of 2014 other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following relief: a. Call for entire records leading to Annexure -A2 final report/charge in the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam and quash the same and all the proceedings arising out of the same in the interest of justice. b. Grant sch other reliefs which are prayed for and deems fit to be granted by this Honourable Court in the interest of justice. 3. The second respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled and he has no grievance against the petitioner and he has filed an affidavit stating these facts and the bank in which he is working as security has also filed Annexure-A4 affidavit and he has no objection in allowing the application. 4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction. So they prayed for allowing the application. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, earlier submitted that the petitioner was accused in two other cases, but later when the petitioner filed affidavit stating that those 3 Crl.M.C.No.3902 of 2014 cases were already closed as there is no case at present pending, the first respondent filed further statement stating that at present there is no case pending and cases mentioned in the earlier statement were later found to be false and they were closed, but opposed the application as it is not a matter to be considered at this stage. 6. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent as defacto complainant Annexure-A1 First Information Report was registered as Crime No.1544/2010 of Ernakulam Central Police Station against the petitioner alleging offences under Sections 341, 323,324, 447, 427 and 294(b) and after investigation, Annexure-A2 final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C.No.3900/2010 and now it is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam. Now the mater has been settled between the petitioner and the defacto complaint. Further they have also filed an affidavit said to have been sworn to by the employer of the second respondent stating that the matter has been settled and they also have no objection in quashing the proceedings. There is no public interest involved in the case. It is purely a private dispute between the two individuals which, on account 4 Crl.M.C.No.3902 of 2014 of the intervention of the mediators, has been settled. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction as neither the defacto complainant nor his witnesses will support the case. So proceeding with the case will only amount to wastage of judicial time. 7. Further, in the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab** [2012 (4) KLT 108(SC)], it has been held that if the case is in a nature of private dispute, which resulted in registration of the crime, and where no public intersect is involved, this Court can invoke the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings, if matter is settled between the parties and their relationship has been restored. 8. Further, it is seen from the allegations and also in view of the dictum laid down in the decisions by this Court, offence under Section 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code will not be attracted as such. 9. Further, in view of the dictum laid down in the decision and also considering the fact that private dispute between the parties resulted in registration of the crime and filing of the final report which has been settled between the parties and on account of the settlement, conviction will be remote, this Court Crl.M.C.No.3902 of 2014 5 feels that it is a fit case where power under Section 482 has to be invoked to quash the proceedings in order to promote the settlement and harmony that has been restored between the parties. 10. So, the petition is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.3900/2010 (Crime No.1544/2010 of Ernakulam Central Police Station) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam, is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately. ## **Sd/-** ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.** cl /true copy/ P.S to Judge Crl.M.C.No.3902 of 2014 6