High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeCriminal proceedings quashed; Crl.M.Cs disposed...

Siddiq K.N., Abdul Nazar and Laila Beevi v. State of Kerala and others

Case / Petition Number:Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Alexander Thomas
Judgment Date
2019-05-22
Court Decision / Holding
The court held that a real settlement exists and that continued prosecution would not serve any purpose. Consequently, it quashed the impugned FIR in Crime No.779/2016 (now CC 184/2017) and the final report in Crime No.782/2016 (now CC 183/2017) under Section 482 Cr.P.C., disposing of Crl.M.C. Nos.3460/2019 and 3488/2019.
Final Disposition
Criminal proceedings quashed; Crl.M.Cs disposed of under Sec 482 Cr.P.C.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • SIDDIQ.K.N
  • ABDUL NAZAR
  • LAILA BEEVI

Respondents

  • Rubeena Shareef
  • Shareef P.H
  • Navas M.A
  • Shefi T.A
  • Akbar Ali
  • State of Kerala (represented by Public Prosecutor)
  • Mohammed Nasar
  • Siddique K.N.
  • Laila Beevi

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
  • • SMT.P.PARVATHY
  • • SMT.SURYA P SHAJI
  • • SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
  • • SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
  • • SRI.U.M.HASSAN

Counsels for Respondents

  • • SRI.ISAC SANJAY
  • • SRI.T.R.RENJITH
  • • SRI.RAFEEK.V.K.

Case Synopsis & Summary

These are two Criminal Miscellaneous Cases under Section 482 Cr.P.C, filed by accused Siddiq K.N., Abdul Nazar and Laila Beevi seeking to quash two sets of criminal proceedings arising from crimes registered at Elamakkara Police Station, Ernakulam. Crl.M.C.3460/2019 relates to Crime No.779/2016 (Anx-I FIR & Final Report) for offences under sections 498A and 323 read with 34 IPC, presently pending as CC 184/2017 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Aluva. Crl.M.C.3488/2019 relates to the counter case, Crime No.782/2016, for offences under sections 324, 326, 354B, 427 and 506(i) read with 34 IPC, presently pending as CC 183/2017. Respondents 1–5 in 3460 and respondents 2–4 in 3488 have sworn affidavits stating that the entire disputes have been settled and have no objection to quashing. The State supports this settlement. The High Court relies on Apex Court precedents Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab to exercise its inherent power under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. where disputes are settled and continued prosecution would serve no purpose. Observing a genuine settlement and no public interest in continuing proceedings, the Court quashes the FIR and final report in the respective cases and disposes of the petitions accordingly, directing quashing of all further proceedings.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.)Sections 498A, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)Sections 324, 326, 354B, 427, 506(i) read with Section 34 of the IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
  • Settlement/compromise as a ground to quash prosecutions in appropriate cases (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab; Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab)

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicants contend that there is a genuine settlement with the defacto complainants and that continuation of prosecution would be futile and waste judicial time. Relying on Gian Singh and Narinder Singh, they submit that the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to quash the prosecutions where disputes have been fully settled and no public interest requires continuation.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents aver that there is a settlement and have no objection to quashing the proceedings; affidavits to that effect have been filed (Annexures II–VI). They rely on the settled nature of the dispute and the absence of public interest in continuing the prosecutions.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab(2012) 10 SCC 303PositiveUsed to justify quashing where disputes are settled and continuation would be futile.
Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr(2014) 6 SCC 466PositiveSupported the principle that settlement can justify quashing prosecutions.

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 Siddiq K.N., Abdul Nazar and Laila Beevi v. State of Kerala and others 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 ALEXANDER THOMAS** **WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2019 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1941 Crl.MC.No. 3460 of 2019 CRIME NO. 779/2016 OF ELAMAKKARA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** |**1**|**SIDDIQ.K.N**| |---|---| ||**AGED 29 YEARS**| ||**S/O ABDUL NAZAR,**| ||**PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL,**| ||**THALACHIRA,CHAKKUVARIKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA**| ||**TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT,**| ||**PRESENTLY RESIIDNG AT SHEEJA MANZIL, CHAITHANYAPURAM,**| ||**KONTHURUTHY, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK,**| ||**ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**| |**2**|**ABDUL NAZAR,**| ||**AGED 59 YEARS**| ||**S/O.SINGAPULI RAWTHER, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA**| ||**MANZIL, THALACHIRA, CHAKKUVARIKKAL VILLAGE,**| ||**KOTTARAKKARA TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT, PRESENTLY**| ||**RESIIDNG AT SHEEJA MANZIL,**| ||**CHAITHANYAPURAM,KONTHURUTHY,ELAMKULAM VILLAGE,**| ||**KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**| |**3**|**LAILA BEEVI,**| ||**AGED 54 YEARS**| ||**W/O.ABDUL NAZAR, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA**| ||**MANZIL, THALACHIRA, CHAKKUVARIKKAL VILLAGE,**| ||**KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT,**| ||**PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL,**| ||**CHAITHANYAPURAM,KONTHURUTHY,ELAMKULAM VILLAGE,**| ||**KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**| ||**BY ADVS.**| ||**SRI.SAIJO HASSAN**| ||**SMT.P.PARVATHY**| ||**SMT.SURYA P SHAJI**| ||**SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN**| ||**SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.**| ||**SRI.U.M.HASSAN**| Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 2 ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:** - **1 RUBEENA SHAREEF D/O.SHAREEF.P.H, AGED 25, PONTHANAL HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686121.** - **2 SHAREEF P.H AGED 59 YEARS S/O HAMEED,PONTHANAL HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA.P.O,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686121.** - **3 NAVAS M.A AGED 40 YEARS S/O ABDUL KAREEM, MUTTATHILPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686121.** - **4 SHEFI T.A AGED 43 YEARS S/O.ABDUL SHUKUR, THATTAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, NADAKKAL, ERATTUPETTA.P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686121.** - **5 AKBAR ALI AGED 38 YEARS S/O.ALI, APPADATH HOUSE, VADASSERY, KOTTAPPADY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686691.** - **6 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** **SRI.ISAC SANJAY FOR R1 TO R5, SRI..T.R.RENJITH FOR R6** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.05.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3488/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 3 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2019 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1941** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3488 of 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 183/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, ALUVA CRIME NO. 782/2016 OF ELAMAKKARA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4:** |**1**|**SHEREEF P.H.**| |---|---| ||**AGED 59 YEARS**| ||**S/O HAMEED, PONTHANAL HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA P.O.**| ||**KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 121.**| |**2**|**NAVAS M.A,**| ||**AGED 40 YEARS**| ||**S/O ABDUL KAREEM, MUTTATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA ,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 121.**| |**3**|**SHEFI T.A.**| ||**AGED 43 YEARS**| ||**S/O ABDUL SHUKOOR,THATTAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, NADAKKAL,**| ||**ERATTUPETTA,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 121.**| |**4**|**AKBAR ALI,**| ||**AGED 38 YEARS**| ||**S/O ALI, APPADATH HOUSE, VADASSERI, KOTTAPPADY,**| ||**KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.ISAC SANJAY**| Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 4 ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.** - **2 MOHAMMED NASAR** **AGED 59 YEARS** **S/O SINGAPPULI RAWATHAR, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL, THALACHIRA, CHAKKUVARICKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL HOUSE, CHAITHANYA PURAM, KONTHURUTHY, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 013.** - **3 SIDDIQUE K.N., AGED 29 YEARS** **S/O MOHAMMED NASAR, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL, THALACHIRA, CHAKKUVARICKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL HOUSE, CHAITHANYA PURAM, KONTHURUTHY, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 013.** - **4 LAILA BEEVI AGED 54 YEARS** **W/O MOHAMMED NASAR, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL, THALACHIRA, CHAKKUVARICKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT SHEEJA MANZIL HOUSE, CHAITHANYA PURAM, KONTHURUTHY, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 013.** **SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1, SRI.RAFEEK.V.K FOR R2 TO R4** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.05.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3460/2019,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 5 ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** **= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019** **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -** Dated this the 22[nd] day of May, 2019 ## **O R D E R** The prayers made in these two Crl.M.Cs filed under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C invoking the inherent powers conferred on this Court as per that provision is to quash respective impugned criminal proceedings in these cases which essentially arise out of two crimes which are said to be case and counter case and the prayer for quashment in both these cases is made on the basis of settlement arrived at between the accused persons and defacto complainant. Crl.M.C.No.3460/2019 arises out of Anx-I FIR & Final Report in Crime No.779/2016 of Elamakkara Police Station, Ernakulam, which has been registered for offence punishable under Secs.498A, 323 read with Sec.34 of the I.P.C, in which the petitioners are the accused therein and respondents 1 to 5 herein are the defacto complainants therein in relation to that crime. Crl.M.C.No.3488/2019 arises out of counter case viz., Anx-1 Final Report in Crime No.782/2016 of Elamakkara Police Station, Ernakulam, which has been registered for offence punishable Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 6 under Secs.324, 326, 354B, 427, 506(i) read with Sec.34 of the I.P.C, in which the petitioners are the accused 1 to 4 therein and respondents 2 to 4 herein are the defacto complainants therein in relation to that crime. Respondents 1 to 5 in Crl.M.C.No3460/2019 have sworn to affidavits produced as Annxs.- II, III, IV, V & VI in that Crl.M.C whereby they have stated that the entire disputes against the petitioners-accused, have been fully settled and that they have no objection in quashing the pending criminal proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.3460/2019. So also the contesting respondents in Crl.M.C.No.3488/2019 have sworn to affidavits as Anxs.2, 3 & 4 therein stating the same aspects regarding settlement and also stated that they have no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings. In Crl.M.C.No.3460/2019, the police after investigation has submitted the impugned Anx-1 FIR & final report in the impugned Crime No.779/2016 and the case is now pending as C.C.No.184/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva. So also, in Crl.M.C.No.3488/2019, the police after investigation has submitted the impugned Anx-1 final report in the impugned Crime No.782/2016 and the case is now pending as C.C.No.183/2017 on the file of JFCM-II, Aluva. It is these proceedings that are sought to be quashed on the ground of settlement. Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 7 2. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in _**Gian Singh** v._ _**State of Punjab**_ reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and _**Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr**_ . reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment. 3. Accordingly, the following orders and directions are issued: (i) It is ordered in Crl.M.C.No.3460/2019 that the impugned Anx-I FIR in Crime No.779/2016 of Elamakkara Police Station, Ernakulam District, which is now pending as Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 8 C.C.No.184/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against all the accused therein will stand quashed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (ii) It is also ordered in Crl.M.C.No.3488/2019 that the impugned Anx-1 final report in Crime No.782/2016 of Elamakkara Police Station, Ernakulam District, which is now pending as C.C.No.183/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against all the accused therein will stand quashed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below concerned. Office of Advocate General will forward copy of this order to the Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information. With these observations and directions, these Crl.M.Cs stand finally disposed of. Sd/- **ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** vgd Crl.M.C. Nos.3460 & 3488 of 2019 9 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.M.C.NO.3460 OF 2019** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH FINAL REPORT** **ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2019** **ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2019. ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2019 ANNEXURE V TRUE COP OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2019. ANNEXURE VI TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.03.2019.** ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.M.C.NO.3488 OF 2019** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 782/16 OF ELAMAKKARA POLICE STATION (CC NO 183/17) ANNEXURE 2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.3.2019 ANNEXURE 3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22.3.2019 ANNEXURE 4 AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.3.2019**