Jishamudheen K T @ Jisham K.T. and others v. Hamsa and others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN** # **MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2013/7TH SRAVANA, 1935** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3138 of 2013** ## **---------------------------** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC NO. 324/2011 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS AND SUB COURT, OTTAPPALAM** **...** **CRIME NO. 158/2010 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD** ## **........** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** **----------------------------------------** **1. JISHAMUDHEEN K T @ JISHAM K.T., AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ABOOBACKER, KOORIYATTUTHODI HOUSE, COLLEGE STREET, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **2. MOHAMMEDALI @ ADAYA ALI, AGED 38 YEARS,** - **S/O.MUHAMMED, KOORIYATTUTHODI HOUSE, COLLEGE STREET, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **3. ASHRAF ALI, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, THAVALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **4. SUWAD, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.YOOSAF, KOORIYATTUTHODI HOUSE, COLLEGE STREET, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **5. NIZAM, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.HAMZAKUTTY, KARUPPANTHODI HOUSE, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **6. ABDUL JALEEL, AGED 29 YEARS,** - **S/O.SIDIQUE, SANKUVALTHODI HOUSE, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **7. SHAFEEK, AGED 26 YEARS,** - **S/O.MANI, CHAKKALIKKAL VEEDU, NEAR GOVERNMENT COLLEGE, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **..2/-** **Kss** **..2...** ## **Crl.M.C.No.3188/2013** **8. HABEEB RAHMAN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.ABOOBACKER, KUNNATH VEEDU, KALLADIPATTA POST, PATTAMBI.** **9. MUJEEB, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.SULAIMAN, KARUPPANTHODI VEEDU, MELEPATTAMBI POST.** **BY ADV. SRI.K.RAJESH SUKUMARAN** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:** **--------------------------------------------------** **1. HAMSA, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, URNIKODEVALAPPIL VEEDU, PATTAMBI POST-679 303.** **2. GAFOOR @ ABDUL GAFOOR,, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMEDALI, KAKKADATHPARACKAL HOUSE, PATTAMBI POST-679 303.** **3. SULFIKAR @ SULFIKAR ALI,, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, URNIKODEVALAPPIL VEEDU, PATTAMBI POST-679 303.** **4. FAIZAL,, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED, POOTHANIYIL HOUSE, KOZHIKUNNU, PERUMUDIYUR, PATTAMBI-679 303.** ## **5. STATE OF KERALA,** - **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI POLICE STATION-679 303.** ## **R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI R5 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S.HYMA** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-07-2013 ALONG WITH CRMC.NO.3139/2013 AND CRMC. NO.3140/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Kss** **Crl.MC.No. 3138 of 2013 ------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: ---------------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE-A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.158/2010 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE-A2: CERTIFIED COPY OF FI STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF CRIME NO.158/2010 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE-A3: CERTIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT FILED IN CRIME NO.158/2010 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE-A4: COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE IST RESPONDENT ISSUED BY NILA HOSPITAL, PATTAMBI.** **ANNEXURE-A5: COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ISSUED BY NILA HOSPITAL, PATTAMBI.** **ANNEXURE-A6: COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT ISSUED BY NILA HOSPITAL, PATTAMBI.** **ANNEXURE-A7: COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT ISSUED BY NILA HOSPITAL, PATTAMBI.** **ANNEXURE-A8: COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.154/2009 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE-A9: COPY OF FI STATEMENT OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN FIR 154/2009 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-10: COPY OF FINAL REPORT FILED IN CRIME NO.154/2009 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION.** **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:** **-----------------------------------------------N I L** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.A.TO JUDGE** **Kss** ## **V.K.MOHANAN, J.** ## **-------------------------------------------------------Crl.M.C.Nos.3138, 3139 & 3140 of 2013 --------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 29[th] day of July, 2013** ## **ORDER** As the parties to the above MCs. are more or less the same and all the dispute covered by the above MCs are settled, these MCs are heard together and being disposed of by this common order. 2. Crl.M.C.No.3138 of 2013 is preferred by the accused in Crime No.158 of 2010 of Pattambi Police Station, which is a case instituted upon the information furnished by the de facto complainant, who is the first respondent, wherein alleged that accused No.6 in Crime No.154 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station and others sustained injuries whereas Crl.M.C.Nos.3139 and 3140 of 2013 are preferred by the accused in Crime No.154 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station in which the first respondent is one Jishamudheen, who is the de facto complainant therein and who is the first accused in Crime No.158 of 2010 of the same Police Station. In Crime No.154 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station covered by Crl.M.C.Nos.3139 and 3140 of 2013 the offences alleged are Crl.M.C.Nos.3138, 3139 & 3140 of 2013 :-2-: under Sections 143, 147, 148 & 308 read with Section 149 of IPC. The allegation in the above crime is that, the accused therein attacked the de facto complainant based upon the enmity connected with the incident occurred in the previous year. Now, the case of the petitioners in the above case is that, the matter is settled out of court. In Crl.M.C.No.3138 of 2013, according to the petitioners/accused, the matter is settled with the first respondent, who is the de facto complainant and other injured. Accordingly, respondents 1 to 4 filed affidavits dated 14/07/2013 before this Court. Similarly, in Crl.M.Appln.Nos.3139 & and 3140 of 2013 according to the petitioners, who are the accused in Crime No.154 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station, the matter is settled with the de facto complainant, who is the first respondent in the above two MCs. who sworn into an affidavit dated 14/7/2013 and thus, the accused as well as the aggrieved persons have no grievance each other. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, it can be seen that the offences involved in the above case are only under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, Crl.M.C.Nos.3138, 3139 & 3140 of 2013 :-3-: 324 & 308 read with Section 149 of IPC which are more or less personal in nature and no public interest is involved. It is pertinent to note that though such offences are involved, the real parties to the dispute approached this Court after having amicably settled the matter. From the submission made by the counsel for the respondent, it appears to me that the de facto complainant has no further grievance against the petitioners/ accused in the light of the settlement arrived by them. In this juncture, it is relevant to note the decision of the Honourable Apex Court reported in **Gian Singh** v. **State of Punjab** [2012 (4) KLT 108(SC)] in which the Supreme Court has held as follows:- “57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under S.320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R. may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would ## Crl.M.C.Nos.3138, 3139 & 3140 of 2013 :-4-: depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed.. ## It is further held as follows:- “......... But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial,mercandile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim........” According to me, in the light of the facts and circumstances involved in the present case and particularly in view of the settlement arrived in the present case, the dictum laid in the above decision is applicable in the present case. According to me, as the parties to the dispute settled the issues amicably, it is the duty of this Court to promote and encourage such settlement, instead of compelling the parties Crl.M.C.Nos.3138, 3139 & 3140 of 2013 :-5-: to go on with the dispute. It is pertinent to note that since the matter is settled out of court, in the event of proceeding with the trial, there would not have any fruitful prosecution resulting the conviction of the accused, rather the net result would be sheer waste of judicial time and abuse of process of the court and proceedings. Thus, according to me, following the decisions cited supra, this Criminal M.C. can be allowed granting the relief as sought for. In the result, Crl.M.C.No.3138 of 2013 is allowed, quashing Annexures-A1 to A3 in Crime No.158 of 2010 of Pattambi Police Station and all further proceedings pending against the petitioners in S.C.No.324 of 2011 on the file of the Assistant Sessions and Subordinate Judge's Court, Ottappalam. Crl.M.C.No.3139 of 2013 is allowed, quashing Annexures-A1 & A2 in Crime No.154 of 2009 of Pattambi Police Station and all further proceedings pending against the petitioners in S.C.No.15 of 2012 on the file of the Assistant Sessions and Subordinate Judge's Court, Ottappalam. Crl.M.C.No.3140 of 2013 is allowed, quashing Annexures-A1 & A2 in Crime No.154 of 2009 of Pattambi Crl.M.C.Nos.3138, 3139 & 3140 of 2013 :-6-: Police Station and all further proceedings pending against the petitioners in S.C.No.608 of 2012 on the file of the Assistant Sessions and Subordinate Judge's Court, Ottappalam. ## **V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE** skj True copy P.A. to Judge