High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2022-08-02Quashed

Sherins Cletus v. State of Kerala & Sara Sherin; Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala & Sara Sherin

Case / Petition Number:CRL.MC Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Dr. Kauser Edappagath
Judgment Date: 2022-08-02
Court Decision / Holding: Both Crl.M.Cs are allowed; all further proceedings in Crime No. 483/2019 of Thrissur Medical College Police Station are quashed.
Final Disposition: Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Sherins Cletus
Anil Kumar

Respondents

State of Kerala
Sara Sherin

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Rajit

Counsels for Respondents

• V. V. Joy
• Sangeetha Raj

Case Synopsis & Summary

These are two Criminal Miscellaneous Cases (Crl.M.C. Nos. 313/2021 and 2492/2021) before a Single Judge of the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam. The petitioners, Sherins Cletus (Crl.M.C. No. 313/2021) and Anil Kumar (Crl.M.C. No. 2492/2021), challenge further proceedings in Thrissur Medical College Police Station Crime No. 483/2019, asserting that the underlying dispute with the de facto complainant Sara Sherin has been amicably settled. The offences alleged include sections 143, 147, 148, and 307 read with 149 IPC; the medical certificates indicate only minor abrasions, and the counsel contends that at best an offence under section 308 would be attracted, not 307. The 2nd respondent (the de facto complainant) has appeared through counsel, and an affidavit evidencing settlement has been produced; the State/Public Prosecutor indicates the matter was investigated and the de facto complainant’s statement recorded as settled. The court relies on Supreme Court precedents Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, which hold that a High Court may exercise jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings in non-compoundable offences where settlement exists, to prevent abuse of process and to secure ends of justice where the dispute is private. It concludes that continuing proceedings would serve no purpose and accordingly quashes all further proceedings in Crime No. 483/2019.

Provisions of Law Cited

IPC 143, 147, 148, 307 read with 149CrPC 482CrPC 320

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Ends of justice
Prevention of abuse of process of the court
Quashing of proceedings in light of settlement under Section 482 CrPC (even in non-compoundable offences) to avoid abuse of process and to secure ends of justice

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners argued for quashing on the basis that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled, the offences are not proven to be non-compoundable in effect, and the injuries shown are minor. They relied on the constitutional and legal principle that the High Court can exercise its power under Section 482 CrPC to quash where settlement exists to meet ends of justice and prevent abuse of process, especially in a private dispute with no public interest. They also noted that the primary charge under IPC Section 307 is not made out and that Section 308 could be applicable.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contended that the matter involves alleged attempted murder and that though settlement exists, the Court should consider public interest and the seriousness of the offences. However, the State’s counsel stated that the matter was amicably settled and supported quashing under the settled facts, recording that the de facto complainant found the matter resolved.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab	2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)	Positive	Apex Court held that High Courts can quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC in settled non-compoundable offences to secure ends of justice and prevent abuse of process.
Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others	(2014) 6 SCC 466	Positive	Affirms the principle that settlement may justify quashing to protect ends of justice in personal disputes.
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others	(2019) 5 SCC 688	Positive	Supports the same settlement-based quashing doctrine in appropriate circumstances.

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 Sherins Cletus v. State of Kerala & Sara Sherin; Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala & Sara Sherin 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 DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 2[ND] DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1944** **CRL.MC NO. 313 OF 2021** **CP 59/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,** ## **VADAKKANCHERRY** **Crime No. 482/2019 of Thrissur Medical College police station PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** SHERINS CLETUS, AGED 27 YEARS S/O. CLETUS R.K., PALLATHUSSERY HOUSE, THADAPARAMBU, THIROOR, RO, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 581. BY ADV RAJIT ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTD BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2 SARA SHERIN AGED 33 YEARS W/O. SHERINS CLETUS, PALLATHUSSERY HOUSE, THADAPARAMBU, THIROOR P.O., MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 581. BY ADV V.V.JOY SRI SANGEETHA RAJ-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 ..2.. ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH** **FRIDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF JULY 2022 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1944** **CRL.MC NO. 2492 OF 2021** **CP 59/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,VADAKKANCHERRY Crime No. 483/2019 of Thrissur Medical police station PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** ANILKUMAR AGED 35 YEARS S/O. RAJAN, PULINAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KILLANNUR VILLAGE, KOZHIKUNNU DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 581 BY ADV RAJIT ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2 SARA SHERIN, AGED 33 YEARS W/O. SHERINS CLETUS, PALLATHUSSERY HOUSE, THADAPARAMBU, THIROOR P.O, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 581 BY ADV V.V.JOY SRI SANGEETHA RAJ-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 **==> picture [19 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** ## **O R D E R** Both these Crl.M.Cs have been filed to quash all further proceedings in Crime No. 483/2019 of Thrissur Medical College police station on the ground of settlement. Crl.M.C. No. 2492 of 2021 has been filed by the 1[st] accused and Crl.M.C. No. 313 of 2021 has been filed by the 2[nd] accused. 2. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 307 read with 149 of the IPC. 3. The 2[nd] respondent, who is the defacto complainant is the wife of the 2[nd] accused. The 2[nd] respondent entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit sworn in by her is also produced. 4. I have heard Sri. Rajit, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. V V Joy, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Sri. Sangeetha Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The prosecution allegation in short is that the 2[nd] respondent while proceeding through Udaya Nagar on a scooter, the 1[st] accused at the instance of the 2[nd] accused wrongfully Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 **==> picture [19 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** restrained her and pulled her into canal, submerged her head into the water and attempted to commit murder. 6. Even though, Section 307 of the IPC has been charged against the petitioners, the entire reading of the FIS together with the material collected during investigation would show that no offence under Section 307 of the IPC has been prima facie made out. At best, the offence under Section 308 of the IPC would alone be attracted. The wound certificates do not show that any injury has been sustained by the de facto complainant except minor abrasions. 7. The averments in the petition as well as the affidavit sworn in by the respondent No. 2 would show that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the _de facto_ complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings further. The learned Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the _de facto_ complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 ..5.. amicably settled. 8. The Apex Court in _**Gian Singh v. State of Punjab**_ [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], _**Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others**_ [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in _**State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others**_ [(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of the case or to ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court. 9. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant in Crime No. 483/2019 of Thrissur Medical College police station. The offences in question do not fall within the category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in _**Gian Singh**_ (supra), _**Narinder Singh**_ (supra) and _**Laxmi Narayan**_ Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 **==> picture [19 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** (supra). For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.Cs. are allowed. All further proceedings in Crime No. 483/2019 of Thrissur Medical College police station hereby stands quashed. Sd/- **DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE** RMV Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 ..7.. ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 313/2021** PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A ANNEXURE A A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE THRISSUR MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.483/2019 BEFORE THE LEARNED JFCM, COURT WADAKKANCHERY. ANNEXURE B A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EVIDENCING THE FACT OF SETTLEMENT. Crl. M C. Nos. 313 & 2492 of 2021 ..8.. ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2492/2021** PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.483/2019 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION ANNEXURE B AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EVIDENCING THE SETTLEMENT OF THE SC NO. 349/2021 OF LEARNED 1ST ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR ARISING FROM CP NO. 59/2020 OF JFCM, WADAKKANCHERY ARISING FROM CRIME NO. 483/2019 OF THRISSUR MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION FACT OF SETTLEMENT.