Suneer and others v. Jamal Mohammed and State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938** ## **Crl.MC.No. 7936 of 2016 ()** **---------------------------** **CRIME NO. 881/2015 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM** **-------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ---------------------** ## **1. SUNEER,** **AGED 30 YEARS, S/O KUNJIMOHAMMED, VADAKKAN HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **2. SULAIMAN,** **AGED 45 YEARS, S/O MAYEEN, VALIYAPEEDIYEKKAL HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **3. ANOOP,** **AGED 32 YEARS, S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR, PULIKKAL PINNOTH HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** ## **4. SALAM,** **AGED 56, S/O UNNEENKUTTY, CHOORAKKUNNAN HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **5. ABOOBACKER,** **AGED 45 YEARS, S/O CHERI, CHERUKAD, HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **6. SIDDIQUE,** **AGED 52 YEARS, S/O ALAVI HAJI, VADAKKAN, HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN** ## **RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:** **------------------------------------** **1. JAMAL MOHAMMED, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O MAMMAD, ARANJIKKAL HOUSE, PATHAPPIRIYAM, EDAVANNA AMSOM, ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN:676541.** **-2-** **-2-** **CRMC NO 7936 OF 2016:** **--------------------** ## **2. STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. (CRIME NO.881/2015 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION IN MALAPPURAM DISTRICT)** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.JITHIN LUKOSE R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI T.R.RENJITH** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **K.V.** **Crl.MC.No. 7936 of 2016 ()** ## **---------------------------** **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES** **----------------------ANNEXURE A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.881/2015 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE A2: THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY IST RESPONDENT DATED 13.11.2016.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL** **-----------------------** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.A.TO JUDGE** **K.V.** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J ---------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.7936 of 2016** **----------------------------------------Dated this the 7th day of December, 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 Crime No.881 of 2015 of Edavanna Police Station. The said crime has been registered at the instance of the 1[st] respondent herein alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435, 506(i), 427 read with Section 149 of the IPC. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that on 8.12.2015 at 6 p.m., - the petitioners along with several others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution 2 Crl.M.C.7936/2016 of their common object, obstructed the movements of the vehicles carrying machines to the concern of the 1[st] respondent and thereafter damaged the vehicles causing loss to the tune of Rs.50 lakhs to the 1[st] respondent. - 4.Heard the submissions advanced. - 5.The learned counsel appearing for the 1[st] respondent submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavit filed by him to buttress his 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. Crl.M.C.7936/2016 3 However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported 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.7936/2016 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 conviction would be bleak. Crl.M.C.7936/2016 5 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. AnnexureA1 FIR in Crime No.881 of 2015 of Edavanna Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed. **SD/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE** vps