Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeQuashed; proceedings terminated against petitio...

null

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C NO.7146 OF 2023
Neutral Citation:null

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Gopinath P.
Judgment Date
2023-09-18
Court Decision / Holding
Crl.M.C is allowed and all further proceedings in CC No.329/2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakkuda (Crime No.617/2022 of Varandarappilly Police Station) shall stand quashed as against the petitioners.
Final Disposition
Quashed; proceedings terminated against petitioners

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Nikhil Chandran @ Unni
  • Amal
  • Martin
  • Sanju
  • Raju
  • Akhil Babu
  • Akhil
  • Manu
  • Yadhu
  • Abinand
  • Ajai Babu
  • Jishnu
  • Shihas
  • Ahsar
  • MOSS

Respondents

  • State of Kerala
  • Rajani
  • Shihas
  • Jishnu
  • Jithin
  • Jinesh
  • Sulaiqa
  • Sujatha

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Abraham Mathan
  • • C.B. Jithin

Counsels for Respondents

  • • G SUDHEER (PP)
  • • C. DHEERAJ RAJAN (FOR R2 TO R8)

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Criminal Miscellaneous Case (Crl.M.C. No.7146 of 2023) filed in the Kerala High Court by 15 accused in Crime No.617/2022 of the Varandarappilly Police Station, Thrissur District, seeking to quash the proceedings in CC No.329/2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakkuda. The petition challenges offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 447, 427, 354A(l)(i), 294(b) and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., that arise from an alleged attack. The respondents include the State and several injured individuals (Rajani and others). The petitioners’ counsel submits that the disputes with the defacto complainant and others have been settled, supported by notarized affidavits (Annexures 3–9). It is contended that, given the nature of the allegations and the affidavits, continuing the prosecution would not serve public interest and the matter should be quashed. The Public Prosecutor and counsel for respondents 2–8 confirm the issues have been settled and that the respondents do not wish to proceed further. The High Court, on hearing, accepts the settlement and, relying on Gian Singh and Laxmi Narayan doctrines, holds that proceedings may be terminated under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court allows the Crl.M.C and quashes CC No.329/2023 against the petitioners.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 143 IPCSection 147 IPCSection 148 IPCSection 341 IPCSection 323 IPCSection 324 IPCSection 447 IPCSection 427 IPCSection 354A(l)(i) IPCSection 294(b) IPCSection 149 IPCSection 482 Cr.P.C.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Settlement between accused and victims can justify quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Gian Singh doctrine).
  • No public interest would be served by continuing with the prosecution.
  • Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303 – doctrine relied upon.
  • State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others (2019) 5 SCC 688 – doctrine relied upon.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that all issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and other injured parties arising from the attack have been settled. Annexures 3 to 9, notarized affidavits by respondents 2–8, support the settlement. It was argued that given the nature of the allegations and the affidavits, continuing the proceedings would not serve public interest and the matter should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The record indicates the affidavits reflect a genuine settlement, and no public interest would be served by prosecution.

Contentions of Respondents

The learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for respondents 2–8 confirmed that the issues between petitioners and respondents 2–8 have been settled and that respondents do not wish to continue with the prosecution in any manner. They contended that the case involves a private dispute and that quashing on the basis of settlement would promote finality and reduce unnecessary litigation. They cited Gian Singh and Laxmi Narayan to support quashing under 482 Cr.P.C.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another(2012) 10 SCC 303PositiveCourt relies on the Gian Singh doctrine to quash proceedings on the basis of settlement.
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others(2019) 5 SCC 688PositiveCourt references Laxmi Narayan doctrine to support quashing in light of settlement.

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 null 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 GOPINATH P. ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 18[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 27TH BHADRA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 7146 OF 2023 ``` ## **`CRIME NO.617/2022 OF THE VARANDARAPPILLY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT`** ``` IN CC 329/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, IRINJALAKUDA PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 15: ``` ``` 1NIKHIL CHANDRAN @ UNNI AGED 27 YEARS, S/O CHANDRAN, NANDIKARA HOUSE, NEAR OLD POST OFFICE, VARANDARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 2AMAL AGED 27 YEARS, S/O AJAYGHOSH, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 3MARTIN AGED 30 YEARS, S/O LASAR, PONNARI HOUSE, NEAR OLD POST OFFICE, VARANDARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 4SANJU, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O SATHEESHAN, MUTHUKULLAM HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 5RAJU AGED 27 YEARS, S/O GOVINDAN, KAMBUZHA HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 6AKHIL BABU, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O BABU, ARRAYKKAL HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. ``` ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 2 ``` ``` 7AKHIL AGED 27 YEARS, S/O SURESH, PONEKKANDATH HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 8MANU, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O MANIKANTAN, THAZHATHUPURAKKAL HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 9YADHU AGED 18 YEARS, S/O MANIKANTAN, THAZHATHUPURAKKAL HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 10ABINAND AGED 28 YEARS, S/O KRISHNAMOORTHY, MADRAS HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 11AJAI BABU AGED 27 YEARS, S/O BABU, ARRAYKKAL HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 12JISHNU AGED 27 YEARS, S/O VISHWANATHAN, MURIYADAN HOUSE, VELOOPADAM KINAR DESAM, VARANDARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 13SHIHAS AGED 27 YEARS, S/O MOOSA, KAILANI HOUSE, VETTINGAPADAM DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 14AHSAR AGED 26 YEARS, S/O HANEEFA, MENAATTIL HOUSE, PULIKKANI DESOM, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. ``` ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 3 ``` ``` 15MOSS AGED 28 YEARS, S/O RAJAN, PUTHANCHIRAKKARAN HOUSE, NEAR JANATHA SCHOOL, VARANDARAPPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. ``` ``` BY ADVS. ABRAHAM MATHAN C.B.JITHIN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/INJURED:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031. ``` ``` 2RAJANI AGED 42 YEARS, W/O SHINOY, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 3SHIHAS AGED 23 YEARS, S/O SHIJEEB, PATHUKUDY HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANDARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. ``` ``` 4JISHNU AGED 26 YEARS, S/O JAYAN, KAAMBUZHA HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. ``` ``` 5JITHIN AGED 24 YEARS, S/O JAYAN, KAAMBUZHA HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 6JINESH AGED 20 YEARS, S/O JAYAN, KAAMBUZHA HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. ``` ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 4 ``` ``` 7SULAIKA, AGED 66 YEARS, W/O MUHAMMED, PATHUKOODY HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. 8SUJATHA AGED 51 YEARS, W/O JAYAN, KAAMBUZHA HOUSE, KORANODY DESOM, VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 303. BY ADVS. G SUDHEER (PP) C. DHEERAJ RAJAN (FOR R2 TO R8) ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 5 ``` ## **ORDER** Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.617/2022 of the Varandarappilly Police Station, Thrissur District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 447, 427, 354 A(l)(i), 294(b) and Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, which is now pending as C.C.No.329/2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakkuda. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that all issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant and other persons who are allegedly injured owing to the attack by the petitioners have been settled. Reference is made in this regard to Annexure- 3 to Annexure-9 notarized affidavits executed by respondents 2 to 8. It is submitted that considering the nature of the allegations and contents of the affidavits produced before this Court, the proceedings against the petitioners may be quashed on the ground of settlement. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 6 ``` counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 8 would confirm that the issues between the petitioners and respondents 2 to 8 have been settled and respondents 2 to 8 do not wish to continue with the prosecution against the petitioners in any manner. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for respondents 2 to 8, I am of the view that the proceedings against the petitioners can be terminated in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. No public interest will be served by continuing with the proceedings against the petitioners. Further, keeping the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another; (2012) 10 SCC 303,** and **State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others; (2019) 5 SCC 688,** I am of the view that considering the nature of the offences alleged against the petitioners the proceedings can be quashed on the basis of settlement. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.329/2023 on the file of the Judicial ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 7 ``` First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakkuda (Crime No.617/2022 of the Varandarappilly Police Station, Thrissur District) will stand quashed as against the petitioners. **Sd/GOPINATH P. JUDGE** ats ``` Crl.M.C. NO.7146 OF 2023 8 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7146/2023`** ``` PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES ``` - `Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 617 OF 2022 OF VARANDARAPPILLY POLICE STATION` - `Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.329 OF 2023 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, IRINJALAKUDA` - `Annexure -3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2023` - `Annexure -4 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED14.06.2023` - `Annexure -5 THE AFFIDAVITSWORN IN BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2023` - `Annexure -6 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2023` - `Annexure -7 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2023` ``` Annexure -8THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE SEVENTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2023 ``` ``` Annexure -9THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE EIGHTH RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2023 ```