Rafi v. State of Kerala and Others

**2025:KER:24775** **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN** **MONDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1947** **CRL.MC NO. 9951 OF 2024** **CRIME NO.563/2022 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, Kollam** **AGAINST SC NO.1659 OF 2022 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/ ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,KOLLAM** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **RAFI AGED 34 YEARS S/O. HAKKIM, RESIDING PORUNNAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, UDAYATHARA NAGAR-84, KAYYALACKAL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM PO, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011** ## **BY ADV B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED (R2 & R3):** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031** - **2 THASLEEMA AGED 21 YEARS D/O. JUNAIDA, RESIDING AT PORUNNAVILAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KAYYALAKKAL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011** - **3 JUNAIDA AGED 44 YEARS W/O. SHAMNAD, RESIDING AT PORUNNAVILAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KAYYALAKKAL CHERRY, ERAVIPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011** **BY ADV B.N.HASKAR ADV.SEENA C. - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON** **24.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 ..2.. **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **2025:KER:24775** **O R D E R** _Dated this the 24[th] day of March, 2025_ A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in _**Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another**_ [(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect of offences which are not compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was that the offences against human body, other than murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be compounded, when the court is in a position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with approval by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in _**Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another**_ [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in _**Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab**_ [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the extent of sanctioning invocation of the inherent power under section Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 ..3.. **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **2025:KER:24775** 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R in a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is a henious and serious offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme in _**Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab**_ [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant findings of which are extracted herebelow: _“6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.”_ **2.** In the facts at hand, petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.563 of 2022 of Eravipuram Police Station, Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 ..4.. **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **2025:KER:24775** Kollam, now pending as S.C.No.1659/2022 before the Additional Sub Court, Kollam. The offences alleged are under Sections 294(b), 452, 323, 354, 308 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner seeks quashment of the entire proceedings in the above Sessions Case, on the strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the parties. **3** . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 & 3 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records. **4.** When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to record the statement of the defacto complainant. The said direction was complied and the statements of the defacto complainant and the injured were handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioner, the defacto complainant and the injured are settled amicably and that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 **2025:KER:24775** **==> picture [59 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, affidavits have been sworn to by the defacto complainant (2[nd] respondent herein) and the 3[rd] respondent as Annexures-A3 and A4, wherein they would unequivocally state that the disputes have been amicably settled. They would also swear that they have no surviving grievance against the petitioner and that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The affidavits are sworn to on their own volition. This Court is therefore convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide. Learned counsel for the respondents 2 & 3 would also endorse that the quashment sought for can be allowed. **5.** In this case, the learned public prosecutor pointed out that the petitioner/accused had other criminal antecedents. In the circumstances, this Court, by order dated 17.03.2025, directed respondents 2 and 3 (defacto complainant and her mother) to be present through video conference so as to assess the genuineness of the Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 **2025:KER:24775** ..6.. **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** settlement. Accordingly, the said persons were present and this Court interacted with them, both of whom were injured in the alleged incident. They would endorse the factum of settlement and would also submit that a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- has been given by the petitioner/accused to them towards the damages caused in the incident. They would specifically state that they have no surviving grievance against the petitioner. In the circumstances, the two antecedents, which are reported by the Public Prosecutor need not stand in the way of the quashment sought for. **6.** In the light of the above referred facts, this Court is of the opinion that the necessary parameters, as culled out in _**Narinder Singh**_ (supra), _**Madan Mohan Abbot**_ (supra) and _**Gian Singh**_ (Supra), are fully satisfied. This court is convinced that further proceedings against the petitioner will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been settled. There is little possibility of any conviction in the crime. _Dehors_ the settlement arrived at Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 **2025:KER:24775** **==> picture [59 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** by and between the parties, if they are compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of this Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court. The quashment sought for would secure the ends of justice. This Court also notice that offences under Sections 323 and 427 are compoundable, which is all the more a reason to accept the compromise between the parties. In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A1 F.I.R, Annexure-A2 Final Report and all further proceedings in Crime No.563/2022 of Eravipuram Police Station, Kollam, are hereby quashed. **Sd/C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE** TR Crl.M.C.No. 9951 of 2024 **2025:KER:24775** ..8.. **==> picture [57 x 57] intentionally omitted <==** ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 9951/2024** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** **Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR DATED 18/05/2022 IN CRIME NO. 563/2022 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN S.C. NO. 1659/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM DATED 26/05/2022 A/W FIS** **Annexure A3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT /DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT** **Annexure A4 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT/INJURED DATED 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024**