JISHNU, ASHIK, ADARSH @ UNNI, ANNAM, SABITH ANWAR v. THE STATE OF KERALA and GAFAR S.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/9TH KARTHIKA, 1938** **Crl.MC.No. 6799 of 2016 () ---------------------------** **AGAINST CC 789/2016 of J.M.F.C.-I,NEDUMANGAD CRIME NO. 424/2016 OF VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM** **PETITIONER(S)/A TO A5: ---------------------** ## **1. JISHNU** **S/O. KRISHNAKUTTY, VISHNU VILOSOM, KULATHUKAL TRIVANDRUM.** **2. ASHIK** **S.O. ABBAS MUNEER MANZIL, THALAKKONAM, MAGALAPURAM TRIVANDRUM** **3. ADARSH @ UNNI** **S/O. RAMANKUTTY, VINAYAKA, NEAR RADIO STATION, MANNVILLA, KULATHOOR VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM** **4. ANNAM** **S/O. NISSAM, NISSAM MANZIL, KAITHAKONAM, NAKRANCHIRA KATTAKADA, VERANAKAVU VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM** **5. SABITH ANWAR S/O. FAZALUDEEN VALLARUMKUNNIL VEEDU, NEAR JUMA MASJID, ELAVOORKONAM, PALLIKAL TRIVANDRUM** **BY ADVS.SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH SRI.P.SANTHOSHKUMAR (KARUMKULAM)** **RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:** **--------------------------** **1. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 682031** **2. GAFAR.S** **S/O. SUDHEER, AGED 23 YEARS,** ## **HILAL MANZIL MAMALIMUKKU, VENJARAMOODU, NELLANDU NEDUMANAGD TRIVANDRUM 695001** **R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.VINAR R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Crl.MC.No. 6799 of 2016 () ---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES** **-----------------------** **ANNEXURE A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.424/2016 OF VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION** **ANNEXURE A2: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CCNO.789/2016 PENDING BEFORE JFCM -1 COURT NEDUMANGAD** **ANNEXURE A3; AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT** **RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL** **-----------------------** **TRUE COPY** **P.A. TO JUDGE.** **kp** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J** - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ## Crl.M.C. No. 6799 of 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated 31[st] October, 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ## **ORDER** - 1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings. - 2.The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 5 in C.C.No.789 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of 1[st] Class-I, Nedumangad. They stand indicated for having committed offences punishable under Sections 323, 294(b) and 324 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The 2[nd] respondent is the de facto complainant. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that on 30.3.2016 at 1 pm, the petitioners assaulted the 2[nd] respondent and caused injuries. - 4.Heard the submissions advanced. - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the 2[nd] respondent Crl.M.C. No.6799 of 2016 -2- submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavit filed by him to buttress his submission. It is urged that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquility. Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony. - 6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported against the petitioners. ## 7.In **Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303** Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of Crl.M.C. No.6799 of 2016 -3- disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows : _“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”_ 8.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court ## in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC** ## **466,** the pertinent observations which are as under: ## _XXXXXXXXXXXX_ _29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:_ ## _(i) ends of justice, or_ Crl.M.C. No.6799 of 2016 -4- _(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives._ _xxxxxxx_ _xxxxxxx_ 9.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society. It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise, persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak. - 10.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings. Crl.M.C. No.6799 of 2016 -5- In the result, this petition will stand allowed. AnnexureA2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners in C.C.No.789 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of 1[st] Class-I, Nedumangad are quashed. **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE** kp/-1.11.16