Sivarajan.K.R and Others v. State of Kerala and J.S.Vijayarajan

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 30TH SRAVANA, 1941** **Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017** **CC 118/2017 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR** **CRIME NO.2732/2016 OF TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** - **1 SIVARAJAN.K.R, AGED 59 YEARS,S/O.RAMAKUTTY, ARUKETTY HOUSE, KUDALIYOOR.P.O, TRICHUR-680656.** - **2 O.P.ACHUTHANKUTTY, AGED 62 YEARS,S/O.GOVINDA MENON, "SHANTHI",GURUVAYOOR POST, THRISSUR-680103.** - **3 O.P.BABU, AGED 50 YEARS,S/O.GOVINDA MENON, "NARAYANEEYAM",LAKSHMI ENCLAVE, KIZHAKUMPATTUKARA,THRISSUR-680005.** - **4 SUGADHAN.K.K, AGED 67 YEARS,S/O.KUMARAN, KOLLAPARAMBIL HOUSE,KOTTANELLOOR POST, THRISSUR-680672.** - **5 UNNIKRISHNAN.M.U, AGED 58 YEARS,S/O.UNNIRI, MELEPURACKAL HOUSE,GREEN PARK AVENUE NO.31, THIRUVAMPADY POST,THRISSUR-680022.** **BY ADVS. SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) SRI.S.BIJU (KIZHAKKANELA)** ## **RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE:** **1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031.** Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 2 **2 J.S.VIJAYARAJAN, AGED 58 YEARS,S/O.SANKARANKUTTY, ITHIKKATTU HOUSE,KUNDALIYOOR.P.O, THRISSUR-680686.** **R2 BY ADV.SRI.RAJIT** **SRI.M.S.BREEZ, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 3 ## **ORDER** Invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“the Code” for short), the petitioners have approached this Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them by the 2[nd] respondent herein, which is now pending on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur, as C.C. No.118 of 2017. In the above proceeding, they face indictment under Sections 403, 406, 408, 409, 420, 120B r/w Section 34 of the IPC. 2. Gist of the prosecution allegation is that the petitioners influenced the shareholders of Aswini Hospital Ltd., Aswini Health care Ltd., Punarjani Securities Ltd. etc., by offering money and deduction in medical bills. By influencing them as aforesaid, they were made members of the Director Board. It is also alleged that on 16.07.2015, the accused withdrew a sum of Rs.2,09,332/- from the account of the company maintained at the South Indian Bank Ltd, Thrissur East Fort branch and caused loss to the de facto complainant. 3. Heard Sri.C.Unnikrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri.Rajit, the learned counsel appearing for the 2[nd] respondent, and the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Sri.Rajit, the learned counsel appearing for the party respondent, submitted that after much deliberations, the victim has resolved his disputes and differences with the petitioners and he has now decided that the continuance of Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 4 criminal proceedings is an unwanted exercise. He refers to the affidavit filed by the victim before this Court and asserts that he has no objection in bringing the prosecution proceedings to a premature termination. 5. Sri.C.Unnikrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, urged that in view of the compromise arrived at between the victim and the offenders, the possibility of conviction is bleak and the continuation of the criminal proceedings will only inure to put both the parties to oppression and prejudice. Both sides submit that the wrong is basically private in nature and no public interest is involved. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the investigating officer has reported that the petitioners are not involved in any other crimes. It is further submitted that the State has no serious objection in quashing the proceedings against them in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 7. I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the records. 8. The factors that are to be borne while exercising powers conferred on this Court by Section 482 of the Code in the context of considering a prayer for quashing criminal proceedings on the basis of resolution of disputes between the offender and the victim have been laid down by the Apex Court in **Gian** Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 5 **Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr** .[1] ; **Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Others v. Babita Raghuvanshi and Another[2]** ; **Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another[3]** ; **Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another[4]** and **State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others[5]** . It was held that the inherent jurisdiction vested in the High Court, as recognized and preserved by Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, is primarily to prevent abuse of the process of court or to secure the ends of justice. The guiding light behind the exercise of inherent power is to do real, complete and substantial justice. It was also held that while examining the prayer for quashing of a non compoundable offence, on the basis of settlement of the dispute between the wrongful doer and the victim, this Court must necessarily consider whether the possibility of conviction is remote and oblique and further as to whether the continuation of the criminal proceedings would lead to oppression and prejudice. The courts were reminded that the antecedents of the accused, possible lack of bona fides, his past conduct, including his earlier abscondance, and as to how he had managed to enter into a compromise with the victim are some of the factors which are to reckoned while exercising this extraordinary power. The Apex Court had also cautioned that this Court, when called upon to exercise the power under Section > 1 [(2012) 10 SCC 303] > 2 [(2013) 4 SCC 58] > 3 [(2014) 6 SCC 466] > 4 [(2017) 9 SCC 641] > 5 [(2019) 4 SCALE 200] Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 6 482 of the Cr.P.C to bring the criminal case to an end on the basis of settlement, must steer clear of intervention in heinous or serious offences, including those involving mental depravity, as indeed economic offences affecting the financial and economic well being of the State, such as murder, attempt to murder, extortion, forgery, rape, dacoity, financial or economic frauds, cases under Arms Act, etc. Those offences were held as having a tendency to have a serious impact upon the society and continuation of trial thereof is essential due to overriding element of public interest. It was also held that the mere fact that the police have incorporated a grave offence in the FIR or the final report would not be a deterrent if the records reveal that the ingredients of the offence are not made out 9. In the light of the above principles, I have perused the prosecution records. I have also noted the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor that the statement of the victim has been recorded by the investigating officer and that he has asserted that it is not in his best interest that the prosecution proceedings continue. Having considered the case in hand on the touchstone of the aforementioned parameters, I am of the view that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace. In a case such as the instant one, even if the prosecution is allowed to continue, it would not serve any purpose as the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It can only Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 7 result in putting the victim and the accused to unwanted oppression and prejudice. Settlement will augur well for the interest of the community and will enable the parties to live in peace and harmony. In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A3 final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as C.C. No.118 of 2017 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur, are quashed. ## **SD/-** **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE** IAP //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Crl.MC.No.6993 OF 2017 8 ## **APPENDIX** ||**APPENDIX**| |---|---| |**PETITIONERS' **|**EXHIBITS:**| |**ANNEXURE A1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BY**| ||**THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS C.M.P.6097/2016 OF**| ||**CJM COURT, THRISSUR**| |**ANNEXURE A2**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.06.2017 IN**| ||**C.M.P.NO.6097/2016 OF CJM COURT, THRISSUR**| |**ANNEXURE A3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME**| ||**NO.2732/2016 BY TRICHUR EAST POLICE STATION**| |**ANNEXURE A4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER OF**| ||**THIS HON'BLE COURT.**| |**ANNEXURE A5**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF STAY IN**| ||**CRL.M.A.NO.11336/2016 IN**| ||**CRL.M.C.NO.7285/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT**| |**ANNEXURE A6**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF STAY IN**| ||**CRL.M.A.NO.9065/2016 IN**| ||**CRL.M.C.NO.5781/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT**| |**ANNEXURE A7**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.10.2017 OF**| ||**THE COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI IN**| ||**C.P.NO.56/2015.**|