High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeFIR quashed; CRL.M.C. allowed; petitioners 1–16...

Sajith N.S and others v. State of Kerala and others

Case / Petition Number:CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022
Neutral Citation:,

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
Judgment Date
2022-06-13
Court Decision / Holding
CRL.M.C. allowed. Annexure 1 FIR in Crime No.176/2022 of Viyyoor Police Station against petitioners (accused Nos. 1–16) is quashed.
Final Disposition
FIR quashed; CRL.M.C. allowed; petitioners 1–16 discharged from further proceedings in Crime No.176/2022.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • SAJITH. N.S
  • FEBINS JOSE
  • AKSHAY JYOTHIS. C.S
  • SHIBIN. V. K
  • AKHILESH. K. A
  • AFNAS C
  • AKHIL. B. S
  • RIYAN JASU IKAL
  • SACHIDANANDAN M S
  • ABDUL NOSHIN
  • NRIDEV KOROTH
  • JITHU. S. PILLAI
  • ALBIN. P K
  • NIKIL. P.P
  • SRAVAN SANKAR
  • ADARSH. S

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala
  • Shameem Kunhammu K
  • Anshad Ahammed
  • Afreedi Abdulla
  • Ashique Usman P.K.
  • Muhammed Irshad K

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • ABRAHAM MATHAN
  • • K.M.SHYJU

Counsels for Respondents

  • • ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN
  • • C.DHEERAJ RAJAN
  • • ADV.M.P.PRASANTH -SR PP

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a criminal miscellaneous case (CRL.MC 2426/2022) before the Kerala High Court, where 16 petitioners, accused Nos. 1–16 in Crime No.176/2022 of Viyyoor Police Station, Thrissur, move to quash the First Information Report. The alleged offences span IPC sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 323, and 324. The FIR relates to an incident dated 19 February 2022 when the petitioners, students of Government Engineering College, Thrissur, allegedly assaulted respondents 2–6, also college students. The petition is grounded on a private dispute and settlement; the injured have filed affidavits (Annexures 2–6) stating they have no subsisting grievance and no objection to quashing. The SHO reportedly verified the settlement and the injured reiterated no objection in court. The court notes that the dispute is private and that continuing proceedings would not serve a public purpose, with a bleak prospect of successful prosecution. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2012(4) KLT 108), the judge holds that the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC permit quashing where there is a settled private dispute and no public interest in continuation. Accordingly, CRL.M.C. is allowed and Annexure 1 FIR against petitioners 1–16 is quashed.

Provisions of Law Cited

Indian Penal Code, Sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 323, 324Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 482

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, 2012(4) KLT 108 — exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIR in a private dispute upon settlement.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the dispute is private in nature and has been resolved through voluntary affidavits by the injured parties (Annexures 2–6), who state they have no subsisting grievance and have no objection to quashing the FIR. The SHO has verified the settlement, and there is no public interest requiring continuation of the case. Relying on the settled law (Gian Singh), they seek to invoke the High Court’s inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to terminate proceedings in the interest of justice and to prevent harassment.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents (injured parties) support settlement, having sworn affidavits (Annexures 2–6) indicating no grievance and no objection to quashing. The State’s counsel confirms veracity of settlement to the extent of withdrawal of objection. The overarching view is to avoid endless litigation where the dispute is private and the prosecution’s chances are bleak.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another2012(4) KLT 108PositiveCourt relies on Gian Singh to exercise inherent powers under 482 CrPC to quash FIR where there is a settled private dispute and no public interest in continuing proceedings.

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 Sajith N.S and others v. State of Kerala and others 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 ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 13[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1944 CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ``` CRIME NO.176/2022 OF VIYYOOR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` SAJITH. N.S 1AGED 21 YEARS S/O SANTHOSH P.N.,NAMBITHANATH HOUSE, VAIKOM P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686141 2FEBINS JOSE AGED 22 YEARS S/O A.D.JOSE, ARACKAPRAMBIL HOUSE, KAPPUVAYAL, THARIODE. P.O, WAYANAD, KERALA, PIN – 673575 3AKSHAY JYOTHIS. C.S AGED 22 YEARS S/O SREENIVASAN, SREELAKAM, KAVALAMUKKATTA P.O, AMARAMBALAM, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679332 4SHIBIN. V. K AGED 21 YEARS S/O BIJU V.K. ANUGRAH HOUSE, CHEENAMPALLI PARAMBIL, KOYILANDY, PIN – 673620 5AKHILESH. K. A AGED 22 YEARS S/O ANIL K.R., KUNNEL HOUSE, EYAMBOAD, NADUVANADU P.O, THILLENKERY, KANNUR, PIN – 670702 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ## **`2`** ``` 6AFNAS C AGED 22 YEARS S/O ABDUL NAZER, CHULLIYIL HOUSE, SETTUKUNNU, ACHOORANAM P. O, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD, PIN – 673575 ``` ``` 7AKHIL. B. S AGED 22 YEARS S/O BAIJU P. THUNDUVILAKATHU VEEDU, VADAKKUMKARA, NEDUMANGAD. P. O, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695541 ``` ``` 8RIYAN JASU IKAL AGED 23 YEARS, S/O SASEENDRAN IKAL, IKAL HOUSE, MATTUL CENTRAL, P.O MATTUL SOUTH, KANNUR, PIN – 670302 ``` ``` 9SACHIDANANDAN M S AGED 21 YEARS S/O SATHIAN M.K., MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ATTORE, KUTTOOR PO, THRISSUR, PIN – 680013 ``` ``` 10ABDUL NOSHIN AGED 21 YEARS ``` ``` S/O MUHAMMED HARIF, POOVATH PARAMBATH HOUSE, CHEEKKONNU WEST P.O, KAKKATIL VIA, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673507 ``` - `11 NRIDEV KOROTH` ``` AGED 21 YEARS ``` ``` S/O RAVINDRAN KOROTH, RITZY HOUSE, NANGHARATH PEEDIKA, TEMPLE GATE. P. O, THALASSERY, KANNUR, PIN – 670102 ``` - `12 JITHU. S. PILLAI AGED 22 YEARS, S/O SUDHARSANAN PILLAI B, UDAYA VILASOM HOUSE, AYLARA. PO, AYLARA, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM, PIN – 691312` ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ``` 3 ``` - `13 ALBIN. P K` ``` AGED 20 YEARS, S/O KURIAKOSE, PAYIKKATT VEEDU, MOTTAYAMKOCHI, KOLICHAL. P. O, PANATHADY, KASARAGOD, PIN – 671532 ``` - `14 NIKIL. P.P AGED 24 YEARS, S/O SATHEESH P.P., CHEMBANIKUNNU HOUSE, KAVANUR P O, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 673639` - `15 SRAVAN SANKAR` - `AGED 20 YEARS, S/O VINOD KUMAR K, MAYALAYAM HOUSE, KULAKKADA, MAVADY, EAST PO KOLLAM, PIN – 691521` - `16 ADARSH. S AGED 21 YEARS, S/O SATHEESH KUMAR, PAVITHRAM MUNDAPMPARAMBU, PULIYAKODE P.O, KIZHISHERI, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 673641` ``` BY ADVS. ``` ``` ABRAHAM MATHAN ``` ``` K.M.SHYJU ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031` - `2 SHAMEEM KUNHAMMU K` ``` AGED 22 YEARS, S/O ABDUL SALAM. K., KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, THACHINGANDAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 679325 ``` - `3 ANSHAD AHAMMED AGED 22 YEARS, S/O ABDUL GAFOOR K. KONARI HOUSE, KODAKKAD P.O,` ``` MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 676319 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ``` 4 ``` - `4 AFREEDI ABDULLA AGED 23 YEARS, S/O BASHHER, PARAVATTI HOUSE, MELATTUR P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 679326` ``` 5ASHIQUE USMAN P.K. AGED 22 YEARS, S/O MUHAAMMED IQBAL P.K. PEEDIKAKANDY HOUSE, THONDAYAD P.O, CHEVARAMBALAM, CALICUT DISTRICT, PIN – 673017 ``` ``` 6MUHAMMED IRSHAD K AGED 22 YEARS, YOOSUF K, KARADAN HOUSE, MANNARMALA P.O, KARIYAVATTAM VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 679325 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ``` ``` ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN C.DHEERAJ RAJAN ADV.M.P.PRASANTH -SR PP ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ## **`5`** ## **`ORDER`** The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 16 in Crime No.176/2022 of Viyyoor Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case is that on 19.02.2022, the petitioners who are the students of Government Engineering College, Thrissur, have assaulted the respondents 2 to 6 who were also the students of the said college. Annexure 1 is the First Information Report. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure 1. 3. Heard Sri.Abraham Mathew, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.Prasanth M.P. learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and Sri.Ananand Kalyanakrishnan C. learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 6. 4. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought for by the petitioners on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the injured ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ``` 6 ``` persons have filed Annexures 2 to 6 affidavits respectively, which were sworn by them. The aforesaid affidavits indicate that, the matter has been settled and the injured persons have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. They have also conveyed that they have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 6/injured persons also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the injured persons have reiterated that, they do not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioners herein. 5. Going through the materials available on record, it is discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioners herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view ``` 7 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` that going by the decision in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108],** this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure 1 First Information Report in Crime No.176/2022 of Viyyoor Police Station as against the petitioners herein who are the accused Nos.1 to 16 respectively are hereby quashed. Sd/- ``` ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE ``` scs ``` CRL.MC NO.2426 OF 2022 ``` ## **`8`** ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2426/2022`** |`PETITIONER`|`ANNEXURES`| |---|---| |`Annexure1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.`| ||`176/2022 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION DATED`| ||`20.02.2022`| |`Annexure2`|`TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY`| ||`THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2022`| |`Annexure3`|`TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY`| ||`THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2022`| |`Annexure4`|`TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY`| ||`THE FOURTH RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2022`| |`Annexure5`|`TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY`| ||`THE FIFTH RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2022`| |`Annexure6`|`TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY`| ||`THE SIXTH RESPONDENT DATED 02.04.2022`|