M. Abdul Azeez and others v. State of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938 Crl.MC.No. 7712 of 2016 () --------------------------CRIME NO. 3083/2016 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION , KOLLAM PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3 & 5.: ------------------------------------- 1. M.ABDUL AZEEZ AGED 56 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED KUNJU, CHAIRMAN, AZEEZIA GROUP OF MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS, RESIDING AT AZEEZIA HOUSE NO.71, GANAPATH NAGAR, THAMARAKULAM PO, KOLLAM. 2. DR. HASSAN AZEEZ S/O M. ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 29 YEARS, AZEEZIA HOUSE NO.71, GANAPATH NAGAR, THAMARAKULAM PO, KOLLAM. 3. DR. MIDHULAJ AZEEZ S/O M. ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED 32 YEARS, AZEEZIA HOUSE NO.71, GANAPATH NAGAR, THAMARAKULAM PO, KOLLAM. 4. NIZAR, S/O ABUBAKKER, AGED 45 YEARS, PROPRIETOR BOOTS & BOOTS, THOPPIL VEEDU, ZAM ZAM NAGAR, PALLIMUKKU PO, KOLLAM. BY ADVS.SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI (SR.) SRI.R.ANIL SRI.M.SUNILKUMAR SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. SRI.T.ANIL KUMAR SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM (NILACKAPPILLIL) SRI.M.VIVEK SRI.A.RAJESH SRI.B.KRISHNA KUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANTS.: ------------------------------------ 1. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.682031. 2. RASIM, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O KUNJUMON, RAHUMA MANZIL (H), PALLITHOTTAM CHERI, SUJIKARAN MUKKU, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM.690001. 3. RAJAGOPAL , AGED 21 YEARS, S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN, MANIMANGALAM (H), BRA -134,THEKKEVILA CHERI, MANDAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM.690001. CONTD... :2: 4. VINEETH - AGED 25 YEARS, S/O VICTOR, PULLIKADA VINEETHA BHAVAN, VADAKKUMBHAGAM CHERI, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM.690001. 5. MANU S.DAS, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O DEVADAS, ATTINKUZHI (H) ATTINKUZHI, CANTONMENT SOUTH, CANTONMENT WARD, KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM.690001. R2-5 BY ADV. SMT.K.R.MONISHA R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SMT.MAYA M.N. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CONTD.. :3: Crl.MC.No. 7712 of 2016 () --------------------------- ## APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- ANNEXURE A THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.3083 OF 2016 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, DATED 24.9.2016. ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIS IN CRIME NO.3083 OF 2016 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, DATED 24.9.2016. ANNEXURE A2 TTHE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REPORT IN CRIME NO.3083/2016 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, DATED 24.9.2016. ANNEXURE B THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE RESPONDENT 2 SWORN BEFORE HIS ADVOCATE ON 4.11.2016. ANNEXURE B1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE RESPONDENT 3 SWRON BEFORE HIS ADVOCATE ON 4.11.2016. ANNEXURE B2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE RESPONDENT 4 SWORN IN HIS ADVOCATE ON 4.11.2016. ANNEXURE B3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE RESPONDENT 5 SWORN BEFORE HIS ADVOCATE ON 4.11.2016. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE SKS ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J ---------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No. 7712 of 2016 ----------------------------------------Dated this the 19[th] day of December, 2016** ## **O R D E R** - 1.This petition is filed under S.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 herein are the accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 in Crime No. 3083 of 2016 of the Kollam East Police Station registered at the instance of the respondent Nos .2 to 5 alleging offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 341, 363 and 506 (ii) r/w Section 149 of the IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that on 23.09.2016 at 9 pm, the petitioners herein formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, wrongfully restrained the respondents 2 to 5 and thereafter Crl. M.C. No. 7712 of 2016 2 assaulted them with weapons causing bodily injuries. - 4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, respondents 2 to 5 and also the learned Public Prosecutor. - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavits filed by them 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 Crl. M.C. No. 7712 of 2016 3 against the petitioners. ## 7.I have considered the submissions . ## 8.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 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.”_ 9.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court ## in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC** Crl. M.C. No. 7712 of 2016 4 ## **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_ _(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_ 10.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 Crl. M.C. No. 7712 of 2016 5 conviction would be bleak. 11.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. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A FIR in Crime No. 3083 of 2016 of Kollam East Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed. **Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE** SKS //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE