Shyam Lal @ Deepu S/o Divakaran v. State of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/16TH KARTHIKA, 1938 Crl.MC.No. 7085 of 2016 () --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 49/2016 of J.M.F.C.-II,ATTINGAL DATED CRIME NO. 1637/2015 OF KAZHAKKUTTOM POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER: ------------------------ 1. SHYAM LAL @ DEEPU S/O.DIVAKARAN, AGED 32 , PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, NEAR JYOTHIS SCHOOL, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. RAGIL @ RAHUL S/O.RAJENDRAN, AGED 29 YEARS, VANIYAMVILAKA HOUSE, NEAR PULLADUKARI DEVI TEMPLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. VAMSHI KRISHNA S/O.SUREDRAN, AGED 24 YEARS, KOPPRAKARIVEEDU, MOOLAYILPURAM, VILAYILKULAM WARD, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ARUN S/O.ARUNACHALAM, AGED 27, AR NIVAS, THEKKEMUKKU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. SUMESH S/O.SURENDRAN, AGED 32 YEARS, KOTTAKARI MOOLAYIL HOUSE, MENAMKULAM VILLAGE, KAZHAKKOTTAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. LALU S/O.VIKRAMAN, AGED 36 YEARS, MANGALASSERY HOUSE, KARIYIL, KATTUKULAM THEKKEMUKKU, KAZHAKKOOTTAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.JAI GEORGE SMT.DAISY A.PHILIPOSE CONTD... :2: Crl.MC.No. 7085 of 2016 () --------------------------- RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.682031 2. MANOJ S/O.MOHANAN, AGED 27 YEARS, MANAKKATTUVILAKOM HOUSE, NEAR BPCL, MENAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001 3. VISHAK S/O.TULASEEDHARAN, AGED 23 YEARS, VILAYILKULAM, MADANKAVU VEEDU, NEAR MADANKAVU TEMPLE, MENAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001 4. VISHNU S/O.TULASEEDHARAN, AGED 25 YEARS, VILAYILKULAM, MADANKAVU VEEDU, NEAR MADANKAVU TEMPLE, MENAMKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695001 R2-4 BY ADV. SRI.HARISH R. MENON R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CONTD... **==> picture [23 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** Crl.MC.No. 7085 of 2016 () --------------------------- ## APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 1637/2015 OF KAZHAKKOTTAM POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 1637/2015 OF KAZHAKKOTTAM POLICE STATION WHICH IS NOW AS PENDING AS C P NO.49/2016 BEFORE THE LEARNED JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT.II, ATTINGAL. ANNEXURE A3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A5 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE SKS ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J ---------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No. 7085 of 2016** ## **----------------------------------------Dated this the 7[th ] day of November, 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 6 in C.P. No. 49 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal. They are accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308, 427 r/w Section 149 of the IPC. The respondents 2 to 4 are the victims. - 3.The crux of the prosecution allegation is that, on 27.12.2015 at 6.30 p.m, the petitioners herein along with 10 other persons, who could be identifiable at sight, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of Crl.M.C. No. 7085 of 2016 2 their common object assaulted the respondents 2 to 4 with weapons and caused injuries. - 4.Heard the submissions advanced. 5.The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavits filed by them to buttress their submission. It is urged that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquility . Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony. - 6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported Crl.M.C. No. 7085 of 2016 3 against the petitioners. 7.I have considered the submissions . ## 8.In **Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303** 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.”_ 9.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in **Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC** Crl.M.C. No. 7085 of 2016 4 ## **466,** the pertinent observations which are as under: _XXXXXXXXXXXX_ _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_ 10.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society .It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise , persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of Crl.M.C. No. 7085 of 2016 5 ## conviction would be bleak. 11.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as C.P.No. 49 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal are quashed. **Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE** //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE SKS