null

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1945 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 1567 OF 2021 ``` ``` CRIME NO.133/2014 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION, ``` ``` Thiruvananthapuram ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT SC 1317/2017 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/SUB COURT, NEDUMANGAD ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 12:`** - `1 VINOD @ PRAVU VINOD AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. RAJAPPAN, THOPPIL ATTARIKATHU VEETTIL, KOTTAPPARA, CHEKKA KONAM MURIYIL, KARAKULAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695564.` - `2 KIRAN KUMAR AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. MANIYANASSARI, LIVING ON RENT, NEAR SHINE ENGINEERING COLLEGE, ANTHIYOOR KONAM DESOM, MALAYIN KEEZH VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695571.` - `3 RAJESH @ TOKKY AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. NADARAJAN ASSARI, AYILYAM HOUSE, WARD 9, NEAR KUNDAMOOZHI TEMPLE, VILAPPIL VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 573.` - `4 ANISH @ MANIKKUTTAN AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. VELUKUTTY, PAPPAMKODU THENGUVILA VEETTIL, MANNADIKONAM, VANDANNUR MURIYIL, MARANELLUR VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 571.` - `5 NISAM AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. RADHAKRISHNAN, PARUTHIVILA PUTHAN VEETTIL, THOPPUMUKK, KALLUMALA (MRA 42), NOW RESIDING AT ARADHANA VEEDU, KACHAANI WARD, ARUVIKKARA VILLAGE, NILAMITHALA VATTIYOORKAV` ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 2 ``` VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 564. ``` - `6 LATE BHUVANACHANDRAN @ BIJU AGED 41 YEARS, PURANTHARAN, S/O. SADASIVAN @ SIRAPAANI, NILAMI, MURUGAVILASAM, THARATTA WARD, KARAKULAM VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 573.` - `7 HARI RAJ @ HARI AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. VELAPPAN ANITHA BHAVAN, NEAR KACHANI HIGH SCHOOL, AKG NAGAR, PEROORKKADA VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 005.` - `8 MAJU AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. SASI, MELEKATTAIKKAAL VEETTIL, VAZHAYILA KAAVADITHALAYKKAL, VETTIKONAM WARD, PEROORKADA, TRIVANDRUM - 695 005.` - `9 RATHEESH` - `AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. SASI PULEEKONAM, KIZHAKKETHIL VEETTIL, CHEKKAKONAM MURIYIL, KARAKULAM VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 573.` - `10 SABU KUMAR AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. STANLY, THONIKKADAV VEETTIL, NEAR MUTTAM CHOOLA, OLATHANNI WARD, NEYYATINKARA, TRIVANDRUM - 695 133.` - `11 ANIL KUMAR @ MAMBAZHAKKARA ANI AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. APPUKUTTAN, SARADA SADANAM, MAMBAZHAKKARA DESOM, PERUMBAZHUTHUR VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 573.` - `12 RAJESH @ VIPIN AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. RAJAN, RAJESH BHAVANAM, MAYILADUM PARA, AYANIKKAD WARD, KARAKULAM` ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 3 ``` VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695573. ``` ``` BY ADV C.RAJENDRAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.` - `2 VIJAYA KUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. PONNAAYYAN, GNRA NO.27, VAZHAYILA GREEN VALLEY, SASTHAMCODE WARD, KARAKULAM VILLAGE, TRIVANDURM - 695 573.` - `3 ADDL R3 NASARUDEEN A. AGED 49 YEARS, NAZAR MANZIL, VATTAKKULAM, ARUVIKKARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.11.2021 IN CRL.M.A. NO.3/2021)` - `4 ADDL R4 SURESH G. AGED 49 YEARS, S/O GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, GREESHMA BHAVAN, MEPPATTUMALA, VELLANADU P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 543 (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.11.2021 IN CRL.M.A. NO.3/2021)` - `5 SUBHASH B` ``` AGED 39 YEARS, S/O BAHULEYAN, SARITHA VILASOM, THEKKEKARA, ERAVOOR, ARYANADU PO, ARYANAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695542 (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 25.10.2023 IN CRL.M.A. NO.1/2023) ``` ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` **==> picture [7 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** ``` BY ADVS. SRI. B.N.HASKAR SMT SREEJA V, PP ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 5 **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------Crl.M.C. No. 1567 of 2021 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 09[th] day of November, 2023** ## **O R D E R** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. The petitioners are the accused in S.C. No.1317/2017 on the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Nedumangad arising from Crime No.133/2014 of Aruvikkara Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 395 and 427 of IPC and also Section 27 of the Arms Act. 6 ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 3. The prosecution case is that the accused persons committed mischiefs and also committed offence under the Arms Act. But, it is submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioners that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, the offence under the Arms Act is not attracted in this case. It is also submitted that the place of occurrence is not a notified area as per the Arms Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavit filed by the victims in support of his contention. The counsel appearing for the victims also submitted that the matter is settled and the victims have no objection in quashing the prosecution. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on 7 ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` instructions, has expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on the basis of the settlement. But the Public Prosecutor conceded that the matter is settled between the parties. 6. This Court has considered the submission of the petitioners, victims and the Public Prosecutor and has also gone through the records including the affidavit filed by the victims. 7. In State of **Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan and Others (2019 (5) SCC 688),** three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The apex court in Laxmi Narayan's case (supra) also relied on the law laid down in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (2012 (10) SCC 303)** and **Narinder Singh** ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 8 ## **and others v. State of Punjab and another (2014** **(6) SCC 466).** The apex court in paragraph 13 of the Laxmi Narayan's case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted hereunder: “13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein above, it is observed and held as under: i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non - compoundable offences under S.320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves; ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society; iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender; iv) offences under S.307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 9 would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of S.307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of S.307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under S.307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital / delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of **Narinder Singh** (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above; v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 10 of non- compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement / compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.” 8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the apex court, this court perused the facts in this case and also perused the documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be accepted. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners in S.C. No.1317/2017 on the file of Assistant Sessions Court, Nedumangad arising from 11 ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` Crime No.133/2014 of Aruvikkara Police Station, are quashed. Sd/- nvj # **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** ``` CRL. M.C. NO.1567 OF 2021 ``` 12 ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1567/2021`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` ANNEXURE A1A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR NO.133/2014 WITH FIS OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN SC NO.1317/2017 ON THE FILES OF ASST. SESSIONS COURT, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE A3ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.01.2021. ANNEXURE A4ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 18.10.2021 ANNEXURE A5ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.10.2021 ANNEXURE A6THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF SUBHASH B, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. BAHULEYAN, SARITHAVILASOM,THEKKEKARA, ERAVOOR, ARYANADU PO, ARYANAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 542, DATED 07/10/2023 ``` RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE