Sandeep and Swathi Sajeev v. State of Kerala and Others

**2025:KER:26642** **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN** **TUESDAY, THE 25[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1947** **CRL.MC NO. 10608 OF 2024** **CRIME NO.98/2023 OF Vadakkekara Police Station, Ernakulam** **AGAINST CC NO.626 OF 2024 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, NORTH PARAVUR** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 AND 2:** - **1 SANDEEP AGED 29 YEARS** **S/O. SAJEEVAN, MADATHISSERIL HOUSE, NEAR VAVAKAD SNDP, VAVAKAD DESOM, MOOTHAKUNNAM VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683516** - **2 SWATHI SAJEEV AGED 28 YEARS** **D/O. SAJEEVAN, MADATHISSERIL HOUSE, NEAR VAVAKAD SNDP, VAVAKAD DESOM , MOOTHAKUNNAM VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683516** ## **BY ADV SANIYA JOSE MAMPILLY** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE, SHO AND VICTIMS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031** - **2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, NORTH PARAVUR, PIN - 683516** - **3 ANUSURAJ K.P S/O PAVANAN, KAKKANATTU HOUSE, HOUSE NO. 4/417, CHITTATTUKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PARAYAKAD DESOM, NORTH PARAVUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN, PIN - 683513** Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 ..2.. **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **2025:KER:26642** - **4 LETHIKA R.K. W/O PAVANAN, KAKKANATTU HOUSE, HOUSE NO. 4/417, CHITTATTUKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PARAYAKAD DESOM, NORTH PARAVUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513** - **5 PADMINI** - **W/O KESAVAN, RAMADI VEETTIL, HOUSE NO. 4/417, CHITTATTUKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PARAYAKAD DESOM, NORTH PARAVUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683513** **BY ADV.P.M.ABDUL JALEEL(KODUNGALLUR)– R3 TO R5** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **ADV.E.C. BINEESH – PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 ..3.. **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **2025:KER:26642** **O R D E R** _Dated this the 25[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. 10608 of 2024 **2025:KER:26642** ..4.. **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R in a crime alleging offences 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, petitioners are accused nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No.98 of 2023 of Vadakkekara Police Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 **2025:KER:26642** **==> picture [59 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Station, Ernakulam, now pending as C.C.No.626/2024 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, North Paravur. The offences alleged are under Sections 341, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners seek quashment of the entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the parties. **3** . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records. **4.** When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to record the statements of the defacto complainant and the victims. The said direction was complied and their statements were handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioners, the defacto complainant and victims are settled and that the defacto complainant and the 2nd accused are legally separated by way of mutual divorce. The defacto complainant and the Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 **2025:KER:26642** ..6.. **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** victims are disinterested to proceed with the prosecution case, any further and that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. That apart, it is noticed that along with this Crl.M.C, affidavits have been sworn to by the defacto complainant (3rd respondent herein) and victims (respondents 4 & 5) as Annexures-A6, A7 and A8, wherein, they would unequivocally state that the disputes have been amicably settled in mediation and that the defacto complainant and the 2nd petitioner have decided to dissolve their marriage. They would also swear that they have no existing enmity towards the petitioners and that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. They do not intend to proceed further with the prosecution case against the petitioners and that the affidavits are sworn to on their own volition, without any compulsion, whatsoever. This Court has also perused Annexure-A5 mediation agreement entered into by the 2nd petitioner and respondents 3 and 4 in O.P.No.1411/2023, before the Family Court, North Paravur, wherein also, they would affirm the Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 **2025:KER:26642** **==> picture [59 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** factum of settlement, the return of gold ornaments, the decision to dissolve the marriage, and also to settle the instant criminal case are seen reiterated. This Court is therefore convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide. Learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 5 would also endorse that the quashment sought for can be allowed. **5.** 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 petitioners 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 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 Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 **2025:KER:26642** **==> picture [59 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** the ends of justice. This Court also notice that offences under Sections 323 and 341 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 Final Report, and all further proceedings in C.C.No.626/2024 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, North Paravur, are hereby quashed. **Sd/-** **C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE** TR Crl.M.C.No. 10608 of 2024 ..9.. **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **2025:KER:26642** ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10608/2024** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** - **Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN C.C.626/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.: I, NORTH PARAVUR,** - **Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF F.I.R. IN CRIME NO 98/2023 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION** - **Annexure A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATE OF THE 3 RD RESPONDENT IN C.C. 626/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.: I, NORTH PARAVUR,** - **Annexure A4 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF SCENE MAHAZAR IN C.C. 626/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT NO.: I, NORTH PARAVUR,** - **Annexure A5 THE TRUE COPY OF MEDIATION AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE PARTIES SETTLING ALL THE CASES NAMELY O.P. 953/2023, O.P. 1411/2023, O.P. 1586/2023 AND M.C. 12/2024 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, N. PARAVUR.** - **Annexure A6 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 3RD, RESPONDENTS, VICTIMS** - **Annexure A7 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY 4TH RESPONDENTS, VICTIMS** - **Annexure A8 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY 5 TH RESPONDENTS, VICTIMS**