High Court of KeralaSingle JudgePetition allowed; FIR/quash of proceedings agai...

SHARON, SHARBI, STEPHIN AND CLINTON v. STATE OF KERALA

Case / Petition Number:CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
Judgment Date
2022-08-05
Court Decision / Holding
CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 is allowed; Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No. 494/2022 of Pattanakkad Police Station against the petitioners is quashed.
Final Disposition
Petition allowed; FIR/quash of proceedings against petitioners.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • SHARON
  • SHARBI
  • STEPHIN
  • CLINTON

Respondents

  • STATE OF KERALA
  • RUBIN PETER
  • JIBIN
  • JASMEL
  • JOMON
  • SAPHIL
  • JIS
  • MICHEL SURJITH
  • FREDIN SHON
  • BENEDICT

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • C.J.VARGHESE VINU

Counsels for Respondents

  • • M.P.Prasanth
  • • M.M.NIAS

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Criminal Miscellaneous Case (CRL.MC No. 4746 of 2022) filed before a Kerala High Court Bench by four petitioners (Sharon, Sharbi, Stephin and Clinton) challenging Crime No. 494/2022 of Pattanakkad Police Station for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 326 IPC. The prosecution alleges that on 10.07.2022 the petitioners formed an unlawful assembly armed with sticks and iron rods and attacked the complainant (2nd respondent) and others, causing injuries; the FIR is Annexure-A1. The petition seeks to quash all further proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., contending that the dispute is private and a settlement has been reached, with affidavits (A2–A10) from respondents 2–10 indicating no subsisting grievances. Respondents 2–10 and the State’s counsel concede to the lack of ongoing grievances and support the quashing. The court relies on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., noting that the private dispute and settlement diminish the likelihood of a successful prosecution and that quashing would serve justice. The Court ultimately allows the CRL.MC and quashes the FIR against petitioners in Crime No. 494/2022.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 143 IPCSection 147 IPCSection 148 IPCSection 149 IPCSection 323 IPCSection 324 IPCSection 326 IPCSection 482 Cr.P.C.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that the FIR in Crime No. 494/2022 arises from a private dispute and a settlement has been reached, evidenced by affidavits A2–A10 by respondents 2–10, who state they bear no subsisting grievances. They contend that continuing proceedings would be futile and a proper use of the court’s inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another is cited as authority to quash where private disputes are settled and public interest is not implicated.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents (2–10) and the State’s counsel do not object to quashing, highlighting that the dispute is private with no ongoing grievances; affidavits verify settlement and the SHO corroborates the lack of objections. The argument centers on balancing the interest of victims with the public interest in not protracting private disputes; the prosecution’s case appears weak given the settlement and absence of aggravating conduct, justifying exercise of inherent powers to prevent futility.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another2012(4)KLT 108PositiveThe court relies on the Gian Singh doctrine to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the FIR in light of a private settlement and absence of subsisting grievances.

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 SHARON, SHARBI, STEPHIN AND CLINTON v. STATE OF KERALA 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. FRIDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ``` (CRIME NO. 494/2022 OF PATTANAKKAD POLICE STATION) ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` 1SHARON AGED 26 YEARS S/O XAVIER MAVELITHAYYIL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 2SHARBI AGED 22 YEARS S/O XAVIER MAVELITHAYYIL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 3STEPHIN AGED 26 YEARS S/O ANTONY MAVELITHAYYIL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 4CLINTON AGED 29 YEARS S/O VARGHESE VALAYIL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 BY ADV C.J.VARGHESE VINU ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2RUBIN PETER AGED 24 YEARS ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ## **`: 2 :`** ``` S/O PETER CHETTIVELIKKAKATH HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 3JIBIN AGED 24 YEARS S/O STEPHAN THAYYIL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 4JASMEL AGED 25 YEARS S/O ANTONY PULIYAMPALLY HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 5JOMON AGED 22 YEARS S/O BENEDIK AZHINAKKAL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 6SAPHIL AGED 25 YEARS S/O SAJI PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 7JIS AGED 27 YEARS S/O AVARACHAN KAVUPURACKAL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 8MICHEL SURJITH AGED 23 YEARS S/O SABU PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ``` : 3 : ``` ``` CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 9FREDIN SHON AGED 23 YEARS S/O SALBI THAYYIL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 10BENEDICT AGED 48 YEARS S/O MATHAI AZHINAKKAL HOUSE ANTHAKARANAZHI P.O CHERTHALA ALAPUZHA, PIN - 688531 BY ADV M.M.NIAS ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ## **`Adv M P PRASHANTH- SR PP`** ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ## **`: 4 :`** ## **O R D E R** ## **Dated this the 5[th] day of August, 2022** The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 494/2022 of Pattanakkad Police Station which was registered for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The prosecution case is that, on 10.07.2022 the petitioners themselves formed into an unlawful assembly with deadly weapons with sticks, iron rod etc, attacked the de facto complainant/ 2[nd] respondent, and caused injuries to them. When respondent Nos. 3 to 10 intervened, they were also assaulted. Annexure-A1 is the FIR submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 FIR. 3. Heard Sri. C.J. Vargheese Vinu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. M.P.Prasanth, the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri. M.M. ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ## **`: 5 :`** Nias, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 10. 4. The prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly for the reason that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, Annexures A2 to A10 affidavits sworn by respondents are produced. The fact of settlement is acknowledged in the aforesaid affidavits and it is also specifically stated that, the respondent Nos. 2 to 10 have no subsisting grievances against the petitioners herein. The respondent Nos. 2 to 10 also clearly expressed their no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioners. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 10 also confirms the aforesaid settlement and supports the prayer sought for by the petitioners herein. 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 respondent Nos. 2 to 10 have ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ``` : 6 : ``` reiterated that, they does not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as they have no subsisting grievances against the petitioners herein. 5. On going through the nature of allegations as contained in Annexure- A1 FIR, it can be seen that, the dispute is basically private in nature. Considering the settlement arrived at between the parties, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak and hence no fruitful purpose would be served if the proceedings are allowed to continue. Therefore, I am of the view 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 Cr.P.C. can be invoked. 6. It is true that one of the offence is under Section 326 of IPC. However, on perusal of the records it is seen that, the injury sustained by the victim which attracts the offence under Section 326 of IPC is only a fracture of bone of his finger. No criminal antecedence of ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ``` : 7 : ``` any of the petitioners were also brought to my notice. Therefore, I am inclined invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even though the offence under Section 326 of IPC is also alleged. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and AnnexureA1 FIR submitted in Crime No. 494/2022 of Pattanakkad Police Station against the petitioners are hereby quashed. **Sd/-** **ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE** LU ``` CRL.MC NO. 4746 OF 2022 ``` ## **`: 8 :`** ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4746/2022`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** ## **`Annexure A1`** ``` Annexure A2 Annexure A3 Annexure A4 Annexure A5 Annexure A6 Annexure A7 Annexure A8 Annexure A9 Annexure A10 ``` ``` CITIZENS COPY OF FIR IN 494/2022 OF PATTANAKKAD POLICE STATION AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY SECOND RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THIRD RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 5TH RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 6TH RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 7TH RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 8TH RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 9TH RESPONDENT AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 10TH RESPONDENT ``` ## **`// True Copy // PA To Judge`**