Majeed and others v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014/15TH SRAVANA, 1936** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3264 of 2014** ## **-----------------------------------** ## **CRIME NO. 142/2014 OF ATHOLI POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT --------------** ## **PETITIONERS / ACCUSED :** - **---------------------------------------** ## **1. MAJEED, AGED 36 YEARS,** - **S/O.MAMMED KOYA, RESIDING AT KARAVAYAL KUNI, KUNNATHARA AMSOM, ULLIYERI DESAM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **2. NASEER, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.MAMMED KOYA, RESIDING AT KARAVAYAL KUNI, KUNNATHARA AMSOM, ULLIYERI DESAM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **3. HARSHAD, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ASSAINAR, HARSHI VILLA, KUNNATHARA AMSOM, ULLIYERI DESAM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **4. RAFI, AGED 28 YEARS,** - **S/O.KUNJASSAN, THANAL, KUNNATHARA AMSOM, ULLIYERI DESAM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **5. HABEEB, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.ALIKOYA, THIRUMANGALATH THAZHE KUNI HOUSE, KUNNATHARA AMSOM, ULLIYERI DESAM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.E.C.BINEESH** ## **RESPONDENTS / STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT - INJURED PERSONS :** - **----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** **2. MUJEEB RAHMAN, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.MAMMED KOYA, MAMMINI PARAMBATH HOUSE, ULLIYERI P.O., KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **3. ABDUL NASEER, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.MAMMED KOYA, MAMMINI PARAMBATH HOUSE, ULLIYERI P.O., KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** Msd. **..2/-** **..2..** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3264 of 2014** ## **4. RASHEED, AGED 45 YEARS,** - **S/O.MAJEED, KUNICHIKKANDY MEETHAL HOUSE, NARATH, ULLIYERI P.O., KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** ## **5. ALIKOYA, AGED 65 YEARS,** **S/O.MOIDI, TAYYULLATHIL HOUSE, NARATH, ULLIYERI P.O., KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA** **R2 TO R5 BY ADV. SMT.M.B.SHYNI** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-08-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Msd. ## **Crl.MC.No. 3264 of 2014** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:** **ANNEXURE 1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORAMTION REPORT IN CRIME NO.142/2014 OF ATHOLI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **ANNEXURE 2 : A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 14.06.2014.** **ANNEXURE 3 : A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14.06.2014.** **ANNEXURE 4 : A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 14.06.2014.** **ANNEXURE 5 : A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 14.06.2014.** ## **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:** ## **NIL** ## **//TRUE COPY//** ## **P.A.TO JUDGE.** Msd. ## **K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. ================= CRL.M.C.NO.3264 OF 2014** **=====================** Dated this the 6[th] day of August, 2014 ## **ORDER** ## **----------** This is an application filed by the accused in Crime No.142/2014 of Atholi police station of Kozhikode District to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioners have been arrayed as accused in Crime No.142/2014, of Atholi police station of Kozhikode district, which was registered on the basis of statement given by the defacto complainant, the second respondent alleging commission of offences under section 341, 323, 324, 506(i), 308, r/w section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation was that on 14.07.2014 at about 11.30 am the petitioners wrongfully restrained the brother of the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant and his friends reached there and at that time, they have attacked the defacto complainant, his brother and his friends and caused some injuries to them and thereby, they have committed the aforesaid offences. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties. There was no grievance existing between the defacto complainant, injured and the petitioners and their old relationship has been restored now. In fact, there was no CRL.M.C.NO.3264 OF 2014 2 public interest involved, and no offence under section 308 of Indian penal Code is also attracted. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction, no purpose will be served by proceedings with the case. Since some of the offences are non compoundable in nature, and it is in the crime stage. Neither the police nor the court below will accept their case and drop the proceedings. So the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief:- _“to quash First Information Report in Crime No.142/2014 of Atholi Police Station, Kozhikode District in the interest of justice”_ 4. Respondents 2 to 5 who are the defacto complainant, and other injured appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of mediators and they have no grievance now and they do not want to prosecute the petitioners. 5. The counsel for the petitioners also submitted that in view of the settlement, no purpose will be served by proceedings with the case and conviction will be remote in such case and he prayed for allowing the application. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor on instruction as directed by this court, submitted that there are no other case against the petitioners and since grave offences have been incorporated it is not a fit case to invoke the section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure to CRL.M.C.NO.3264 OF 2014 3 quash the proceedings as it is in the investigation stage. 7. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners have been arrayed as accused in Crime no.142/2014 of Atholi police station of Kozhikode district which was registered on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent as defacto complainant alleging offences under section 341, 323, 324, 506(1), 308, r/w section 149 of Indian Penal Code and the investigation has been started on 14.07.2014. It is also seen from the allegations in the first Information Report itself that when there was some altercation going on between the brother of the defacto complainant and the accused persons, the other injured came there and there was some incident happened in which respondents 2 to 5 have sustained some injuries. It is true that it is in the preliminary stage of the investigation and section 308 of Indian Penal Code has been incorporated. I have gone through the case diary file which contains the wound certificates of the injured including the defacto complainant which show that there is no major injuries sustained by any of the persons and only minor injuries have been sustained by them. So under the circumstances, I don’t think that section 308 of Indian Penal Code will be attracted in this case. It is true that when grave offences have been incorporated and when public interest is involved, then in such cases even if the matter is settled between the victims and the accused persons, court should not normally to CRL.M.C.NO.3264 OF 2014 4 quash the proceedings as it will affect the law and order of the society. But at the same time, when an incident happened which is a private nature which resulted in registration of crime and if matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of well-wishers of both parties and proceeding with the case will only amount to wastage of judicial time and conviction in such cases will not be possible, then court can invoke the power under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings. In this case, in view of the settlement neither the defacto complainant, other injured nor witnesses of the defacto complainant are likely to cooperate with the investigating officer to proceed with the investigation to file final report in a effective manner. Even if on the basis of the already collected evidence, if final report is filed, and the case is taken on file, in view of the settlement none of these persons will support the case of the prosecution and conviction in such cases will be remote as well. 8. In the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab 2012(4) KLT 108 (SC** ), it has been held that, of no public interest is involved and a crime has been registered on account of private dispute between the parties and if the matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of the wellwishers and continuation of the proceedings will not have any effective adjudication and result in conviction, then the power under CRL.M.C.NO.3264 OF 2014 5 section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure can be invoked to quash the proceedings in order to promote the settlement. In this case, it is seen from the name of the parties that all these people were residing in the same locality and belongs to the same community. So due to the intervention of well-wishers of both the parties, now the matter has been settled and harmony has been brought between the community members. So in view of the dictum laid on in the above decision and also considering the fact that the matter has been settled and harmony between the same community people as their relationship has been restored on account of the settlement and conviction in such cases will be remote, this court feels that it is a fit case where the power under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has to be invoked to quash the proceedings to promote the settlement and harmony that has been restored between the parties and pendency of this case should not be a hurdle for the same. So the application is allowed and further proceedings in Crime No.142/2014 of Atholi police station of Kozhikode District against the petitioners is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately so as to inform the police station for necessary further action in this regard. ## **K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE**