Nijas s/o Majeed and others v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MAY 2016/28TH VAISAKHA, 1938** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2700 of 2016 ()** ## **--------------------------CRIME NO. 482/2016 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT** **---------------------** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :** **--------------------------------------** **1. NIJAS S/O.MAJEED, AGED 19 YEARS, KALAPPURAYIL HOUSE, PERUMBILLICHIRA, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** **2. AMAN @ RUBEESH S/O.SALIM, CHUDUKATTIL HOUSE, AGED 19, ELAMDESAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** **3. AFSAL** - **S/O.HANEEFA, AGED 19, ELAYIDATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ELAMDESAM P.O., THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** **4. AMEER** - **S/O.NASEER, AGED 19, PULLIKKUDIYIL HOUSE, WEST KODUKKULAM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** **5. RIYAS** - **S/O.YOUSEPH, AGED 20, CHUDUKATTIL HOUSE, UDUMBANOOR, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.** ## **BY ADV. SRI. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT :** **-------------------------------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.** **...2/-** **Crl.MC.No. 2700 of 2016 () -2-** **2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 508.** **3. AJMAL S/O.AZEEZ, AGED 24, PALAMOOTTIL HOUSE, NEAR CANAL BAGHOM, EDAVETTIKKARA, KARIKODE VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 508.** **4. FAISAL S/O.NAZEER, AGED 19 YEARS, PUTHENVEETTIL HOUSE, EDAVETTY KARA, KARIKODE VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 508.** **R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE P. R3 & R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.ARUN** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Mn** **...3/-** **Crl.MC.No. 2700 of 2016 () -------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES : ----------------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.482/2016 OF THE THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES : NIL -----------------------------------------------------------------** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A. TO JUDGE** **Mn** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.** ## **-------------------------------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.2700 of 2016 -------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 18[th] day of May, 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 quash all further proceedings in Crime No.482/2016 of Thodupuzha police station on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties. - 2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crime No.482/2016 of Thodupuzha police station registered at the instance of the 3[rd] respondent herein alleging offence punishable under r/w S.143, 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 326 r/w S.149 of the IPC. - 3.I have heard the rival submissions. - 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that at the time of commission of the offence, the petitioners were students of Al-Azhar College, Thodupuzha Crl.M.C.No.2700 of 2016 : 2 : - and relying on Annexures A2 and A3 affidavits filed before the court by the party respondents, it is submitted that the dispute between the injured witnesses and the accused has been amicably resolved. It is submitted that though S.326 of the IPC is also incorporated, only minor injuries were sustained. - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 banking on the affidavit sworn by them submitted that the respondents do not wish that the criminal prosecution initiated at their instance should continue as against the petitioners herein. It is further submitted that the dispute is purely personal in nature and therefore, would not affect public peace or tranquility and prays that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote harmony. - 6.The learned public prosecutor, on instructions, submits that the petitioners are not persons with any criminal antecedents and the state has no serious objection in acting on the affidavits filed by respondent Nos.3 and 4 Crl.M.C.No.2700 of 2016 : 3 : and in terms of the pronouncements of this Court as well as the Apex Court. ## 7.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.”_ ## 8.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC 466,** the pertinent ## observations which are as under: _“29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would_ Crl.M.C.No.2700 of 2016 : 4 : _be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:_ _29.1 Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code.No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution._ _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_ - 9.It is beyond any cavil that when the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature and do not affect public peace or tranquility and when it is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of Crl.M.C.No.2700 of 2016 : 5 : compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice, the inherent powers under Section 482 can very well be exercised to quash the criminal proceedings. In such cases persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak. - 10.In view of the above, the continuance of proceedings arising out of the above crime would be an exercise in futility and the criminal proceedings pending as against the petitioners can be quashed by invoking the inherent powers of this Court under S.482 of the Code. - 11.In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.482/2016 of Thodupuzha police station shall stand quashed. ## Sd/- **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE.** Bb _[True copy]_ _P.A to Judge_