High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2022-09-19Crl.M.C. allowed; quashed the final report (Ann...

Mohammed @ Mamu S/O Pareed; Moithu S/O Pareed; Maitheen @ Kunjumon S/O Neenakunju; Ismayil S/O Neenakunju; Hammed S/O Meeran v. State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C 5663 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A
Judgment Date: 2022-09-19
Court Decision / Holding: This Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A2 final report in Crime No.319/2018 of Kottappady Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C No.262/2019 before the Additional Sessions Court-II, North Paravoor as against the petitioners are hereby quashed.
Final Disposition: Crl.M.C. allowed; quashed the final report (Annexure-A2) and all further proceedings in S.C No.262/2019 against the petitioners; the prosecution in Crime No.319/2018 is quashed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

MOHAMMED @ MAMU S/O PAREED
MOITHU S/O PAREED
MAITHEEN @ KUNJUMON S/O NEENAKUNJU
ISMAYIL S/O NEENAKUNJU
HAMMED S/O MEERAN

Respondents

STATE OF KERALA represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
MUHAMMED ANWAR S/O ALI
SALEEM S/O SAITH
ALI S/O PAREETH
SAITH S/O PAREETH
MANSOOR S/O SALEEM
ABOOBAKKER S/O PAREETH

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• JAI GEORGE

Counsels for Respondents

• C S HRITHWIK
• T. E. ISMAIL

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Kerala High Court criminal miscellaneous case (Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022) concerns a petition to quash proceedings arising from Crime No.319/2018 of Kottappady Police Station, now pending as S.C No.262/2019 before the Additional Sessions Court-II, North Paravoor. The accused petitioners—five individuals named in the record—are charged under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 326 and 307 read with 149 (unlawful assembly and offences including intent to injure). The prosecution case alleges a 30.03.2018 attack on respondents 2–7 stemming from a prior dispute over a pathway between neighbours. The petitioners contend that the dispute is essentially private and has been settled, with affidavits (Annexures A3–A8) sworn by the injured parties stating no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing. The SHO’s verification of the settlement is also noted. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, the court recognizes the private nature of the dispute and the absence of public interest, allowing its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings. The order also notes a connected case (Crime No.320/2018) where a mutual settlement exists. The court quashes Annexure-A2 final report and all further proceedings in S.C 262/2019 against the petitioners, effectively ending the prosecution in this matter.

Provisions of Law Cited

Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal CodeSection 482 Cr.P.C.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another doctrine (quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C in cases of private settlement)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the dispute leading to the alleged offences was private in nature and has been settled amicably, as evidenced by affidavits (Annexures A3–A8). The SHO verified the settlement, and the injured parties stated they have no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing. Relying on Gian Singh, they submit that the High Court should exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings to prevent harassment, especially where there is no public interest in continuing the case and the matter concerns neighbors and a civil dispute over a pathway. They emphasize the lack of criminal antecedents and the mediation-based settlement already achieved.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents acknowledge the private nature of the dispute but do not dispute the settled position; the State’s counsel confirms verification of the settlement by the SHO and the injured parties’ lack of objection to quashing. They argue that, given the settlement and absence of ongoing grievance, quashing would serve ends of justice and preserve neighborly relations without undermining public interests, especially since the connected case (Crime No. 320/2018) also shows mutual settlement.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another	2012(4) KLT 108	Positive	Cited as the controlling principle enabling invocation of 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings in the backdrop of a private settlement and absence of public interest.

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 Mohammed @ Mamu S/O Pareed; Moithu S/O Pareed; Maitheen @ Kunjumon S/O Neenakunju; Ismayil S/O Neenakunju; Hammed S/O Meeran v. State of Kerala and Others 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 ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.** **MONDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 28TH BHADRA, 1944** ## **CRL.MC NO. 5663 OF 2022** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTSC 262/2019 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - II, NORTH PARAVUR / I ADDITIONAL MACT, NORTH PARAVUR** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED A1 TO A5:** 1 MOHAMMED @ MAMU S/O PAREED AGED 48 YEARS PAKKATTUMOLEL HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 2 MOITHU S/O PAREED AGED 56 YEARS PAKKAATTUMOLEL HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN - 686692 3 MAITHEEN @ KUNJUMON S/O NEENAKUNJU AGED 49 YEARS PAKKAATTUMOLEL HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 4 ISMAYIL S/O NEENAKUNJU AGED 29 YEARS PAKKAATTUMOLEL HOUSE 2 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 5 HAMMED S/O MEERAN AGED 50 YEARS PAKKAATTUMOLEL HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT , PIN - 686692 BY ADV JAI GEORGE ## **RESPONDENT/S:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 MUHAMMED ANWAR S/O ALI AGED 28 YEARS THEKKEMOLATH HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 3 SALEEM S/O SAITH AGED 54 YEARS THEKKEMOLATH HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN - 686692 4 ALI S/O PAREETH AGED 51 YEARS THEKKEMOLATH HOUSE 3 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 5 SAITH S/O PAREETH AGED 46 YEARS THEKKEMOLATH HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 6 MANSOOR S/O SALEEM AGED 29 YEARS THEKKEMOLATH HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 7 ABOOBAKKER S/O PAREETH AGED 61 YEARS THEKKEMOLATH HOUSE PANIPRA KARA THRIKKARIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686692 BY ADV T.E.ISMAIL ADV C S HRITHWIK- SR PP **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** 4 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 ## **O R D E R** The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 5 in Crime No.319/2018 of Kottappady Police Station which is now pending as S.C No.262/2019 before the Additional Sessions Court-II, North Paravoor. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case is that, on 30.03.2018, at 7.30 p.m, due to the previous animosity and in furtherance of a common object, the petitioner formed into an unlawful assembly armed with dangerous weapons, attacked the respondents 2 to 7 and thereby causing injuries to them. Annexure-A2 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.MC is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant thereto. 3. Heard Sri. Jai George, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. C.S Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri. T.E Ismail, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 7. 5 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 4. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the injured persons have sworn Annexures-A3 to A8 affidavits respectively. The aforesaid affidavits indicate that, the matter has been settled and the injured persons have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. They also conveyed that they have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel for the respondents Nos.2 to 7/injured persons also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the injured persons have reiterated that, they do not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. 5. Going through the materials available on record, it is discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose 6 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 would be served if the proceedings against the petitioners herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view that going by the decision in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108],** this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked. 6. It is true that, some of the offences alleged are under Sections 326 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. However, it is seen from the records that, the incident which is the subject matter of this Crime has stemmed up from a dispute between the parties relating to a pathway. The parties are neighbors as well. In connection with the very same incident, Crime No. 320/2018 is registered by the Kottappady Police Station against the respondents Nos. 2 to 7 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 308 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and the same is now pending as S.C No. 262/2019 before the Additional Sessions Court-II, North Paravoor. The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought for on the basis 7 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 of mutual settlement in both these cases. Crl.M.C 5395/2022 is filed by the accused persons in Crime No. 320/2018 who are the respondents Nos.2 to 7/injured persons in this case. It is discernible from the records that, all the disputes between the parties have been settled in mediation with the intervention of neighbors. All of them have expressed their willingness to discontinue the prosecution against each other. It is also brought to my notice that, none of the petitioners or the respondents are having any criminal antecedents. The materials indicate that, the incident occurred, in connection with a civil disputes with regard to the right of a pathway and apparently it was under the heat of passion. Thus considering the entire aspects of the case, I am of the view that, eventhough the offences alleged against each other are serious in nature, the powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to quash all the said proceedings, so as to ensure the cordial relationship between the parties who are neighbors. In such circumstances, I am inclined to allow this Crl.M.C. 8 Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A2 final report in Crime No.319/2018 of Kottapady Police Station and all further proceedings in S.C No. 262/2019 pending before the Additional Sessions Court-II, North Paravoor as against the petitioners are hereby quashed. Sd/- **ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE** rpk 9 ## Crl.M.C No.5663 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5663/2022** ## PETITIONER ANNEXURES |Annexure A1|A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION| |---|---| ||REPORT IN CRIME 319 OF 2018 OF KOTTAPADY| ||POLICE STATION.| |Annexure A2|A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME| ||NO: 319 OF 2018 OF KOTTAPADY POLICE| ||STATION WHICH IS NOW PENDING AS S.C. NO:| ||262/2019 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL| ||DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT-II, NORTH| ||PARAVUR| |Annexure A3|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT| |Annexure A4|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT| |Annexure A5|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT| |Annexure A6|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT| |Annexure A7|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT| |Annexure A8|THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT|