Ramesh K.R. and Others v. State of Kerala and Johnson Devassy and Jinto John

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** ## **MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938** **Crl.MC.No. 6791 of 2016 ()** ## **---------------------------** ## **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 124/2013 of J.M.F.C.-I, ALUVA CRIME NO. 2724/2010 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONERS:** - **-------------** ## **1. RAMESH K.R.** - **S/O RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 27 YEARS, KALAKKASSERIL HOUSE, VELIYATHUNADU, ALUWA WEST, ERNAKULAM** ## **2. SARATH JOSHI** - **S/O JOSHI, AGED 25 YEARS MARAMUTHU HOUSE, KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR.** ## **3. ARUN DOMINIC** - **S/O DOMINIC, AGED 30 YEARS, PARASSERY HOUSE, ALUWA WEST, ERNAKULAM** **4. BEHANAN.K. AREECKAL, S/O KURIAKOSE, AGED 27 YEARS, AREECKAL HOUSE, NEDUMBASSERY, ERNAKULAM** **BY ADV. SRI.V.S.ANU MON** ## **RESPONDENT(S)//STATE AND CW1:** **-----------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA** - **REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALUWA POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM** **2. JOHNSON DEVASSY S/O DEVASSY, AGED 24 YEARS, VADAKUMCHERRY HOUSE, NEDUMBASSERRY P.O. ERNAKULAM DIST.** **3. JINTO JOHN S/O JOHN, AGED 32 YEARS THEKKUMKATTIL HOUSE, MANJAPRA P.O. ERNAKULAM** **R2,3 BY ADV. SRI.DEEPAK MOHAN R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.M.R.DHANIL** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **Crl.MC.No. 6791 of 2016 ()** ## **---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** **-----------------------** **ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED CPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIMENO.2724/2010 OF ALUWA POLICE STATION FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRARTE COURT-I, ALUWA AND IS PENDINGAS CC NO.124/2013** - **ANNEXURE A2** - **THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.2724/2010 OF ALUWA POLICE STATION FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,ALUWA AND IS PENDING AS CC NO.124/2013** - **ANNEXURE 3 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT/2ND RESPONDENT** - **ANNEXURE 4 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT/CW2** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS** - **-----------------------** **//TRUE COPY//** **PA TO JUDGE** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J ---------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.6791 of 2016** **----------------------------------------Dated this the 28[th] day of November, 2016** ## **O R D E R ~~~~~~~~** - 1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( hereinafter referred to as the Code ) with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings. - 2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C.No.124 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Aluva. They stand indicted under Sections 324 and 341 read with Section 34 of the IPC. It appears that the petitioners as well as the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were the former students of the Union Christ College (U.C. College), Aluva. They owe allegiance to rival political parties. There occurred an incident on 1.1.2010 pursuant to the College elections inside the College premises. The Crl.M.C.6791/2016 2 prosecution alleges that the petitioners herein wrongfully restrained the respondents 2 and 3 and assaulted them with weapons causing injuries. - 3.Heard the submissions advanced. - 4.The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavits filed by them to buttress his submission . It is urged that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquility . Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony. - 5.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. Crl.M.C.6791/2016 3 However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported against the petitioners. 6.I have considered the submissions . 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 by the Apex Court Crl.M.C.6791/2016 4 ## in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. [** (2014) 6 SCC 466], the pertinent observations which are as under: _XXXXXXXXXXXX_ _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.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society .It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise , persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of Crl.M.C.6791/2016 5 conviction would be bleak. 10.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as C.C.No.124 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Aluva are quashed. **Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE** ps/28/11/16