SRS Holidays and Travels Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala (Criminal Misc. Case No. 6753 of 2022)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 13TH ASWINA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 6753 OF 2022** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 107/2020 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 5:** 1 SRS HOLIDAYS AND TRAVELS PVT. LTD. C/O VIJAI POLYMER, HOUSE NO. 127B, SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE ROAD, JAWAHAR NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI682020 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIDE SAKTHI PRAKASH, PIN - 682020 2 RITE HEDDGE CREDITS AND INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD. ROOM NI. 172, 2ND FLOOR, DD VYAPAR BHAVAN, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM- 682 020 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, BIDE SAKTHI PRAKASH, PIN - 682020 3 BIDE SAKTHI PRAKASH AGED 45 YEARS S/O DEVARAJAN, SARASWATHI NIVAS, THAMARABHAGOM, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011 4 REJIPRASAD.R.S AGED 43 YEARS S/O RENGAN, PON NIVAS, NEAR GOVT. POLY TECNIC HIGH SCHOOL, ARCHANA NAGAR, PONGAM MOODU, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695011 5 RAMESH AGED 47 YEARS S/O BHASKARAN, EDATHODI VEEDU, PARUTHIPULLY, PERUNGOTTUKURISSI VILLAGE, ALATHUR,PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541 BY ADV E.S.SANEEJ ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 2 KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KUZHALMANNAM POLICE STATION, CANDAPURA, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678702 3 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CRIME BRANCH CID ECONOMIC OFFENCE-II DPO ROAD, PUDUPALLI THRUVU, NURANI, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001 4 L.UNNIKRISHNAN, AGED 66 YEARS S/O LAKSHMANAN (LATE), MOOTHATTUPARAMBU, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678702 5 CHENTHAMARAKSHAN, AGED 68 YEARS S/O VEEBANKUTTY, APARNA HOUSE, AANAKKODE, KUZHALMANNAM, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678702 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ## **OTHER PRESENT:** HRITCWICK CS PP ADV.DEEPU RAJAGOPAL FOR R4 AND R5 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 3 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -** CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -** Dated this the 5[th] day of October, 2023 ## **ORDER** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. The petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.107/2020 on the files of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Palakkad arising from Crime No.786/2011 of CBCID, Palakkad. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w Section 34 IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that the accused cheated the victims. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavit filed by the victims in support of his contention. The counsel appearing for the victims also CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 4 submitted that the matter is settled and the victims have no objection in quashing the prosecution. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on the basis of the settlement. But the Public Prosecutor conceded that the matter is settled between the parties. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are other cases also against the petitioners. 6. This Court has considered the submission of the petitioners, victim and the Public Prosecutor and has also gone through the records including the affidavit filed by the victim. 7. In **State of Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan and Others (2019 (5) SCC 688),** three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The apex court in _**Laxmi Narayan**_ 's case (supra) also relied on the law laid down in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (2012 (10) SCC 303)** and **Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another (2014 (6) SCC 466)** . The CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 5 apex court in paragraph 13 of the _**Laxmi Narayan**_ 's case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted ## hereunder: _“13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein above, it is observed and held as under:_ _i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non - compoundable offences under S.320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;_ _ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;_ _iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;_ _iv) offences under S.307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of S.307 IPC in the FIR or the charge_ CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 6 _is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of S.307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under S.307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital / delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above;_ _v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement / compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.”_ 8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the apex court, this court perused the facts in this case and also perused the documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire facts and circumstances I am of the considered opinion that the dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be accepted. CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 7 Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C.No.107/2020 on the files of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Palakkad arising from Crime No.786/2011 of CBCID, Palakkad are quashed. Sd/- **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** bng CRL.MC No.6753 of 2022 8 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6753/2022** PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC 107/2020 OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD Annexure2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 14.09.2022 Annexure3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 14.09.2022 Annexure 4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC 2679/2019 DATED 07.05.2019 Annexure 5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC 3453/2022 DATED 23.06.2022