Shereef and others v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MAY 2016/28TH VAISAKHA, 1938** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2735 of 2016 ()** **--------------------------CC.NO. 636/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD CRIME NO. 99/2014 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM DISTRICT** **------------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1-5:** **------------------------------------------------------** ## **1. SHEREEF,** - **AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. USMAN K., KANNANKERI HOUSE, CSEZ P.O., KAKKANAD, CHITTETHUKARA.** ## **2. PRAVEEN DAS,** **AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. SHIVADASAN, KANNANKERI HOUSE, CHITTETHUKARA, ERNAKULAM.** ## **3. ABDUL ASIS,** - **AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. ABUBAKAR, KUNNAPILLY, KAKKANAD, CHITTETHUKARA, ERNAKULAM.** ## **4. JESLO POUL,** - **AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. JOSY, MOTHIRAPILLY HOUSE, KAKKANAD, CHITTETHUKARA, CSEZ P.O., ERNAKULAM.** ## **5. SHIBU K.N.,** **AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANAN, KANNANKERI, KAKKANAD, CHITTETHUKARA, KAKKANAD, CSEZ P.O., ERNAKULAM.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VARGHESE** ## **RESPONDENT(S)/STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT CW2 & CW3:** **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** **2. AJAS, S/O. K.B.ALIYAR, AGED 30 YEARS, KANNANKERI HOUSE, CHITTETHUKARA, C.S.E.Z P.O., KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 031** **2/-** **-2-** ## **CRL.MC.NO.2735/2016** **3. NOWFAL,** - **S/O. ABDUL KHADER, AGED 25 YEARS, PARAYNMOOLA HOUSE, CHITTETHUKARA, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 030** **4. SHAJAHAN,S/O. SULIMAN, AGED 25 YEARS, KUNNAPILLY HOUSE, CHITTETHUKARA, CSEZ P.O., KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 030** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P.MAYA R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SMT.NIMA JACOB** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2735 of 2016 ()** **--------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: -----------------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE 1 A COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAKKANAD. ANNEXURE 2 A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE 3 A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE 4 A COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT.** **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL** **------------------------------------------------** **/TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE** **sts** **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J. -------------------------------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.2735 of 2016 -------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 18[th] day of May, 2016** ## **O R D E R** - 1.This petition is filed under S.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 5 in C.C.No.636/2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad. The aforesaid case arose on the basis of a crime registered at the instance of the 2[nd] respondent herein. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the injured witnesses. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the matter has been settled between the parties. Reliance is placed on Annexures 2 to 4 affidavits filed by the respondents 2 to 4 to substantiate the said contention. Crl.M.C.No.2735 of 2016 : 2 : - 3.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. - 4.It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4 that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. It is urged that Annexures 2 to 4 affidavits filed by the respondents 2 to 4 speaks in unmistakable terms that the respondents do not wish that the criminal proceedings initiated as against the petitioners should continue. According to the learned counsel, the dispute is purely personal in nature and therefore, would not affect public peace or tranquility and prays that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote harmony. - 5.The learned public prosecutor, on instructions would submit that the petitioners are not persons with any criminal antecedents and the state has no serious objection in acting on the basis of the affidavit and in terms of the pronouncements of this Court as well as the Apex Court. - 6.In **Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303** Crl.M.C.No.2735 of 2016 : 3 : 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.”_ 7.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in ## **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC 466,** the pertinent observations which are as under: _“29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction_ Crl.M.C.No.2735 of 2016 : 4 : _to continue with the criminal proceedings:_ _29.1 Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code.No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution._ _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_ 8.Tested in the anvil of the parameters fixed by the Apex Court, and when the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature and do not affect public peace or tranquility and when it is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice, the inherent powers under Section 482 can very well be exercised to quash the Crl.M.C.No.2735 of 2016 : 5 : - criminal proceedings. In such cases persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak. - 9.I have considered the final report and also ascertained the nature of injuries sustained and the same does not appear to be grave. - 10.In view of the above, the continuance of proceedings in the instant case would be an exercise in futility and the criminal proceedings pending as against the petitioners can be quashed by invoking the inherent powers of this Court under S.482 of the Code. - 11.In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. - All further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.636/2015 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad shall stand quashed. Sd/- **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE.** Bb _[True copy]_ _P.A to Judge_