Rajesh and Others v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA** **TUESDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 2ND BHADRA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 3058 OF 2021** **CRIME NO.783/2020 OF Nooranadu Police Station, Alappuzha AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 870/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - II, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** **1 RAJESH, AGED 38 YEARS S/O. MURALEEDHARAN NAIR, RAJESH BHAVANAM, PATHIRAKKAL MURI, PATHANAPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT CHINJU BHAVANAM, CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** - **2 LAIJU, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. VASEDEVAN, LAKSHMI NIVAS, CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** - **3 RATHEESH, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. KUMARANA, MAVULLATHIL HOUSE, CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** - **4 RANJITH KUMAR @ RANJU, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O. KUNJUMON, CHINJU BHAVANAM. CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** - **5 JAYADEEP, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. JAYAN, PALAVILAYIL HOUSE, CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** **BY ADVS. RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW** **-2-** ## **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.** **2 JANAMMA, AGED 64 YEARS, D/O. THEVI, VADAKKEKARA VEEDU, CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** - **3 SHIBU, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. REMANAN, VADAKKEKARA VEEDU, CHERUMUKHA MURI, NOORANAD VILLAGE, PIN-690504.** **BY ADV RESMY M.S** **BY ADV.C.N.PRABHAKARAN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION** **ON 24.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** **-3-** ## **ORDER** This petition has been filed to quash Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.783/2020 of Nooranad Police Station and all proceedings pending against the petitioners on the basis of Annexure A2 Final Report in C.C.No.870/2020 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mavelikara. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the crime was registered as per the complaint filed by the second respondent under Sections 143, 147, 149, 324, 427 and 447 of the IPC. Annexure-A1 is the copy of the FIR. After investigation, final report was filed and copy of the same is produced as Annexure-A2. 3. The prosecution case is that on 23.07.2020 at 9.40 p.m., the petitioners trespassed into the house of the second respondent and assaulted respondent Nos.2 and 3 and caused damage to their property. 4. Separate affidavit have been filed by the defacto complainant and the injured-Shibu, wherein they have categorically stated about the apology tendered by the petitioners and in view of the same, they pardoned the petitioners. It is also **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** **-4-** stated that since the matter has been settled between the parties, they have no further grievance against the petitioners. 5. The counsel for the defacto complainant has appeared and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and they have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that statement of the defacto complainant/Janamma was taken and in which, she also stated in tune with the averments in the petition regarding the settlement arrived at between the parties. 7. In **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another** **(2012 10 SCC 303 : 2012 KHC 4530)** a three Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procesure, 1973 has held that criminal cases having civil flavour and arising from commercial, financial merchantile, civil, partnership, matrimony relating to dowry or family disputes where wrong is private or personal in nature can be quashed in view of the settlement between the parties. Paragraph 57 of the said decision is relevant in this context to be extracted which reads as follows :- “The position that emerges from the above discussion can be **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** **-5-** summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** **-6-** cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. 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 proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and 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 affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.” 8. The parties are neighbours and the matter has been amicably settled in between them. There is no public interest involved and the dispute is private in nature. In the said circumstances, the continuance of the proceedings would be a waste of time of the Court and ends of justice demands quashment of further proceedings against the petitioners. 9. In the said circumstances, I find it just and proper to quash Annexure A2 charge in crime No.783/2020 of Nooranad police station and all further proceedings pending against the petitioners. It is ordered accordingly. **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** **-7-** In the result, this Crl.M.C. stands allowed as above. **Sd/-** **M.R.ANITHA JUDGE** nkr **CRL.M.C.NO.3058 OF 2021** **-8-** ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3058/2021** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURE** |**Annexure A1**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME**| |---|---| ||**NO.783/2020 OF THE NOORANAD POLICE**| ||**STATION.**| |**Annexure A2**|**CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL**| ||**REPORT/CHARGE IN CRIME NO.783/2020 OF**| ||**NOORANAD POLICE STATION.**| |**Annexure A3**|**THE ATTESTED AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND**| ||**RESPONDENT.**| |**Annexure A4**|**THE ATTESTED AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD**| ||**RESPONDENT.**|