Mohammed Shaham and others v. State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: V.G. Arun
Judgment Date: 2020-10-15
Court Decision / Holding: The Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in CC 788/2019, on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Tirur, are quashed.
Final Disposition: Crl.M.C allowed; proceedings quashed in CC 788/2019

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Mohammed Shaham
Shihab
Ashraf
Sahal Ghalib Salim
Nijil Joseph
Muhammed Afreed
Faheem Ali
Muhammed Shameem

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
Mohammed Shahas
Ahammed Sha Moidu
Ashil
Hashil Arikkath
Shamjith

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. Binish Mathew

Counsels for Respondents

• C.S. Hrithwik (Senior Public Prosecutor)
• M.K. MUFEED

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Criminal Misc. Case (Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020) filed before the Kerala High Court by eight accused challenging the proceedings in CC No.788 of 2019 (Crime No.77/2019) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Tirur. The petition seeks quashing of the criminal proceedings under the court’s inherent power in light of an amicable settlement between the parties. The gravamen arises from offences under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with 149, which allege unlawful assembly, rioting, trespass, and injuries during an incident. The de facto complainant and other injured respondents (Nos. 3–6) filed affidavits stating the dispute has been resolved amicably and they have no subsisting grievance. The Public Prosecutor informs the court that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents. The court notes that the dispute is settled, there is no public interest involved, and the prospect of conviction is remote; continuing the proceedings would amount to abuse of process. Relying on Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008) 4 SCC 582 and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the court finds no impediment to grant relief. Consequently, the Crl.M.C is allowed and the proceedings in CC 788/2019 are quashed. The order is by Justice V.G. Arun, Single Judge.

Provisions of Law Cited

IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 341, 323, 324, 326 r/w 149

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Abuse of process of court
Inherent powers of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings in light of settlement (as discussed in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners seek quashing on the ground that the dispute among the parties has been amicably settled as reflected in affidavits A5–A9, with no subsisting grievance. They contend there is no public interest in pursuing the matter, the likelihood of conviction is remote, and continuing proceedings would amount to abuse of process. They rely on the Supreme Court's decisions in Madan Mohan Abbot and Gian Singh to justify exercise of inherent power to quash where settlement exists.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents acknowledge the offences alleged under IPC and, on record, the affidavits indicate an amicable settlement with no further grievance. While emphasizing the seriousness of the offences, they accept that the settlement and lack of public interest permit the court to exercise its inherent power to quash if justice so requires; the State Public Prosecutor supports quashing in the light of settlement and absence of public interest.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab	(2008) 4 SCC 582	Positive	Cited to support the court's use of inherent power to quash proceedings where there is a settlement and no public interest.
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another	(2012) 10 SCC 303	Positive	Cited for the principle that quashing may be appropriate where continued proceedings would be an abuse of process in light of settlement.

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** **THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 23RD ASWINA, 1942** **Crl.MC.No.4197 OF 2020(D)** **CC 788/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, TIRUR** **CRIME NO.77/2019 OF Kuttipuram Police Station, Malappuram** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **1 MOHAMMED SHAHAM AGED 23 YEARS S/O.ABDUL LATHEEF, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, RESIDING AT ALACKAL HOUSE, MEPPADI, COTTANADU P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673577.** **2 SHIHAB, AGED 23 YEARS S/O.HASSAN, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PULLAYIL HOUSE, KANJIRAMUKKU P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679584.** - **3 ASHRAF, AGED 21 YEARS** **S/O.SAIDU MUHAMMED, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, SAIDU MANZIL, PARALI P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678612.** - **4 SAHAL GHALIB SALIM, AGED 23 YEARS S/O.SALIM, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, A.M.HOUSE, MEPPADI P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-673577.** **5 NIJIL JOSEPH, AGED 23 YEARS S/O.JOSEPH, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PANAYANGATTU HOUSE, PULAKADAVU ROAD, MARIKUNNU P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673012.** **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 2 - **6 MUHAMMED AFREED, AGED 22 YEARS** - **S/O.AFATAB, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, DARUL ZEENATH HOUSE, MAYANMUKKU, KANJIRODE P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-670592.** - **7 FAHEEM ALI, AGED 23 YEARS** - **S/O.SULFIKAR ALI, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KEEDATHU HOUSE, ALANALLUR P.O., MANNARKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-678601.** - **8 MUHAMMED SHAMEEM, AGED 23 YEARS** **S/O.ABDUL LATHEEF, MES ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KUTTIPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, OTHUKUNGAL P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-676528.** **BY ADV. SRI.BINISH MATHEW** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.** - **2 MOHAMMED SHAHAS AGED 22 YEARS** - **S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, RESIDING AT KARUMANNIL VEEDU HOUSE, KUZHIPPURAM, IRINGALLUR P.O., VENGARA, PIN-676304, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** - **3 AHAMMED SHA MOIDU, AGED 21 YEARS** - **S/O.YOOSUF THACHINGNADU, RESIDING AT KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, THACHINGNADU, P.O.PANDIKKADU, PIN676521, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 3 **4 ASHIL, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.SUCHITHRAN, RESIDING AT THANDAAN VEEDU HOUSE, CHETTIPPADI P.O., PARAPPANANGADI, PIN676319, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** - **5 HASHIL ARIKKATH, AGED 22 YEARS S/O.ALI, RESIDING AT HARSHID HOUSE, PUTHIYANGADI P.O., PIN-673021, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.** **6 SHAMJITH, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.SALEENA, RESIDING AT KORMATH HOUSE, THUVVOOR P.O., PIN-679327, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **R2-6 BY ADV. M.K.MUFEED** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION** **ON 15.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 4 ## **ORDER** Dated this the 15[th] day of October **,** 2020 **Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.77 of 2019 registered at the Kuttipuram Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 341, 323, 324, 326 r/w Section 149 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.788 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Tirur. The** _**de facto**_ **complainant and the other persons injured in the incident are arrayed as respondents 3 to 6. Annexures A5, A6, A7, A8 and A9 affidavits have been filed by the said respondents stating that the dispute which had resulted in the incident and registration of the crime has been resolved amicably and they have no subsisting grievance in the matter.** **2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners** **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 5 ## **have no criminal antecedents.** **3. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the respondents 2 to 6, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and that no public 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.** **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 6 **In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.788 of 2019 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Tirur, is quashed.** **sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE** Scl/15.10.2020 **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 7 ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN C.C.NO.788/2019 ON THE FILES HONORABLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURTI, TIRUR. ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.788/2019 ON THE FILES OF HONORABLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, TIRUR. ANNEXURE A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ACCIDENT REGISTER CUM WOUND CERTIFICATE IN C.C.NO.788/2019 ON THE FILES OF HONORABLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, TIRUR.** **ANNEXURE A4 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE LIST OF WITNESS IN SESSIONS CASE NO.C.C.NO.788/2019 ON THE FILES OF HONORABLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, TIRUR. ANNEXURE A5 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT NOTARIZED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A6 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT NOTARIZED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A7 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT NOTARIZED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A8 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT NOTARIZED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A9 THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT NOTARIZED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** **Crl.M.C.No.4197 of 2020** 8