High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2021-01-29FIR and proceedings quashed; relief granted to ...

MANOJ JOSEPH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF KERALA

Case / Petition Number:Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: V.G. Arun
Judgment Date: 2021-01-29
Court Decision / Holding: This Crl.MC is allowed. Annexure A1 FIR and the proceedings in Crime No.1532/2020 registered at the Mararikulam Police Station are quashed.
Final Disposition: FIR and proceedings quashed; relief granted to petitioners

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Manoj Joseph
Dr. Sibin Joy Vayalin
Dr. Pyarelal
Rajesh

Respondents

Rohita Raj R
Haripriya Ajimon
Arya Baby
Meera Babu
Arya A.L.
Jewel Jiss V.C.
State of Kerala, represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• G. Priyadarsan Thampi

Counsels for Respondents

• Bhavana Velayudhan
• Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Kerala High Court criminal miscellaneous case (Crl.MC No.51 of 2021) concerns four petitioners, who are accused in Crime No.1532/2020 at Mararikulam Police Station, registered for offences punishable under sections 420 and 406 r/w 34 IPC. The petition seeks quashing of the FIR and proceedings on grounds that the dispute with the affected students has been amicably resolved and there is no public interest in continuing criminal proceedings. The background facts reveal that the K.V.M. College of Nursing admitted students for B.Sc Nursing in 2019-20 without proper affiliation for that academic year. The de facto complainants and other aggrieved persons claimed they were forced to seek refunds and compensation after discovering the lack of affiliation. Although a settlement was reached, the college withdrew from it. The petition argues the college had affiliation since 2002 and that in 2019-20 the state nursing bodies allocated 60 seats, whereas the university later intimated only 30 seats, leading to grievances among admitted students. Respondents filed affidavits stating the dispute has been resolved and no subsisting grievance exists. The Public Prosecutor indicated no criminal antecedents. After weighing the gravity of the offences, affidavits, and statements, the court found the dispute settled, the likelihood of conviction remote, and that continuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process, citing Madan Mohan Abbot and Gian Singh. The court allowed the Crl.M.C and quashed the FIR and proceedings.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 420 IPCSection 406 r/w Section 34 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Abuse of process of the court
Quashing of criminal proceedings on settlement (as per Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the college had affiliation from 2002 onwards. For 2019-20, the University/State bodies allotted 60 seats, but an intimation reduced it to 30 seats, causing some admitted students to be ousted. The dispute with those students has been amicably settled, and the respondents have filed affidavits stating no subsisting grievance. They emphasize that criminal proceedings, given the lack of ongoing grievance and no likelihood of conviction, would be an abuse of process of the court. They rely on established jurisprudence that quashing is appropriate where settlement exists and public interest is not implicated.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents assert that the dispute among the ousted students has been resolved; affidavits indicate no continuing grievance, and the settled matter justifies quashing to avoid unnecessary prosecution. The State, through the Public Prosecutor, notes there are no criminal antecedents and endorses ending the proceedings in light of the settlement.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab	2008) 4 SCC 582	Positive	Cited to support the principle that criminal proceedings may be quashed to avoid abuse of process where settlement exists and no public interest remains.
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another	2012) 10 SCC 303	Positive	Cited to reinforce that quashing is permissible when disputes are settled and no public interest justifies continuation.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against MANOJ JOSEPH AND OTHERS v. STATE OF KERALA and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 9TH MAGHA, 1942** ## **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F)** **CRIME NO.1532/2020 OF Mararikulam Police Station , Alappuzha** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:** - **1 MANOJ JOSEPH AGED 42 YEARS S/O.T.V.JOSEPH, MANAGER, K.V.M.COLLEGE OF NURSING, MARUTHORAVATTOM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688 524.** - **2 DR.SIBIN JOY VAYALIN, AGED 44 YEARS S/O.RAJEE XAVIER, PRINCIPAL, K.V.M. COLLEGE OF NURSING, MARUTHORVATTOM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688 524.** - **3 DR.PYARELAL, AGED 72 YEARS S/O.K.V.VELAYUDHAN, SARASWATHAM, MARUTHORVTTOM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688 524 (DIRECTOR, K.V.M. COLLEGE OF NURSING).** - **4 RAJESH, AGED 47 YEARS S/O.GOPALAN, SARASWATHAM, MARUTHORVATTOM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688 524 (DIRECTOR, K.V.M. COLLEGE OF NURSING).** ## **BY ADV. SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI** ## **RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT, OTHER AGGRIEVED PERSONS & STATE:** - **1 ROHITA RAJ R AGED 18 YEARS D/O.RAJENDRAN, SUSHAMA MANDHIRAM, EZHUPUNNA, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 535.** - **2 HARIPRIYA AJIMON AGED 19 YEARS D/O.AJIMON, MANIMANGALAM HOUSE, KARUKAYIL WARD, THATHAMPALLY P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688 013.** - **3 ARYA BABY AGED 20 YEARS** **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..2..** **D/O.BABY, KUTTIPURAM HOUSE, MUHAMMA P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 525.** **4 MEERA BABU AGED 18 YEARS D/O.BABU, MATTAPALLIL, VARANAM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 523.** **5 ARYA A.L. AGED 20 YEARS D/O.LAIJU, ASHARIPARAMBIL, WARD NO.18, MARARIKULAM SOUTH PANCHAYATH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 532.** **6 JEWEL JISS V.C. AGED 21 YEARS S/O.CHARLES, VELIYAKATHARUKATTIL, OTTAMASSERY, THAIKKAL P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 027.** **7 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031, (REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARARIKKULAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA).** ## **R1-6 BY ADV. BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..3..** ## **ORDER** **Dated this the 29th day of January 2021** Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1532/2020 registered at the Mararikulam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 r/w 34 of IPC. The crime is registered on the allegation that the de facto complainant, along with five other students, as admitted to the B.Sc Nursing Course in KVM Nursing College, of which the petitioners are the Manager, Principal and Directors respectively. After securing admission and paying the requisite fees, the students came to know that the College did not have affiliation for B.Sc nursing course for the year 2019-20. Thereupon, they sought reimbursement of the fees and also compensation. Though a settlement was arrived at, the management withdrew from the settlement and hence, the **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..4..** complaint. 2. According to the petitioners, the College of Nursing is having affiliation from the University from the year 2002 onwards. In the academic year 20192020, the State Nursing Council as well as the Indian Nursing Council allocated 60 seats to the College and accordingly, the College its admission process. All on a sudden, intimation was received from the University that only 30 seats are allotted for that year. This resulted in some of the admitted students being forced to go out. It is submitted that the dispute with the ousted students, including the de facto complainant in the instant case, has been settled amicably and none of the students have any subsisting grievance. The _de facto_ complainant and the other aggrieved persons are arrayed as respondents 1 to 6. Annexures-A8 to A13 affidavits have been filed by the said respondents **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..5..** stating that the dispute, which was the reason for the incident and registration of the crime, has been resolved and have no amicably they subsisting grievance against the petitioners. Annexures-A14 to A24 are copies of the signed statements of the ousted students, stating that the dispute having been resolved, they have no grievance against the petitioners. 3. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. 4. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavits filed by respondents 1 to 6 and the signed statements of the students, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and no public **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..6..** interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in _**Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab**_ [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and _**Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another**_ [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief sought. In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. AnnexureA1 FIR and the proceedings in Crime No.1532/2020 registered at the Mararikulam Police Station is quashed. SB/29/01/2020 **Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE** ## **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..7..** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.1532/2020 OF MARARIKULAM POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE A2 RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN STAMP PAPER. ANNEXURE A3 RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN STAMP PAPER. ANNEXURE A4 RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN STAMP PAPER. ANNEXURE A5 RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IN STAMP PAPER. ANNEXURE A6 RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN STAMP PAPER. ANNEXURE A7 RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT IN STAMP PAPER. ANNEXURE A8 AFFIDAVIT DATED 24.12.2020 SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A9 AFFIDAVIT DATED 24.12.2020 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A10 AFFIDAVIT DATED 24.12.2020 SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A11 AFFIDAVIT DATED 24.12.2020 SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A12 AFFIDAVIT DATED 24.12.2020 SWORN BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A13 AFFIDAVIT DATED 24.12.2020 SWORN BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE P14 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY DEVI S.NAIR. ANNEXURE P15 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED** **Crl.MC.No.51 OF 2021(F) ..8..** **24.12.2020 ISSUED BY SREELEKSHMI M.J.** **ANNEXURE P16 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 21.12.2020 ISSUED BY KRIPA BIJU. ANNEXURE P17 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 21.12.2020 ISSUED BY SONA SIBICHAN. ANNEXURE P18 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY WAHIYATH A. ANNEXURE P19 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY MEREENA KURIAN. ANNEXURE P20 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY JISA MARIA TOMY. ANNEXURE P21 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY ALEENA THOMAS. ANNEXURE P22 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY AASHIDA P.B. ANNEXURE P23 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY ANNAMARIA JOHNSON. ANNEXURE P24 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY RAJEENA N.** //true copy// P.A to Judge