Udayakumar and others v. State of Kerala and Sangamitra S.R.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/1ST PHALGUNA, 1938** **Crl.MC.No. 1116 of 2017 () ---------------------------** **AGAINST CC 578/2014 of J.F.C.M,VARKALA CRIME NO. 274/2014 OF AYIROOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** - **-------------------** **1. UDAYAKUMAR, AGED 51, S/O.JANARDHANA KURUP, RESIDING AT SHERLY MANDIRAM, NEAR U.P.SCHOOL, AYIROOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695310** **2. ARJUN, AGED 21, S/O.UDAYAKUMAR, RESIDING AT SHERLY MANDIRAM, NEAR U.P.SCHOOL, AYIROOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695310** **3. BIJU, AGED 39, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT VISAKHOM VEEDU, AYIROOR FROM BIJU BHAVAN, PUTHENCHANTA, VETTOOR, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **4. JAGAL PRATHAPAN @ BABU, AGED 51, S/O.JANARDHANAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT KOCHU VEDU(VISHAKHAM), AYIROOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **5. MANIKANTAN, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.SADASIVAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT THANKAMONY MANDIRAM, AYIROOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **6. SHIBUKUMAR, AGED 39, S/O.SUKUMARA PILLAI, KEEZHAPURATHU VEEDU, NEAR THRIMPATTOM TEMPLE, AYIROOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695310** **BY ADVS.SRI.M.RAJENDRAN NAIR SMT.M.SANTHY** ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:** ## **----------------------------------------** ## **1. STATE OF KERALA,** - **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI** ## **2. SANGAMITRA S.R.,** **AGED 39, D/O.SREEKANTAN NAIR, RESIDING AT SREERAGAM, AYIROOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695310** **R2 BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Crl.MC.No. 1116 of 2017 () ---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES ----------------------ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.578/2014 (CRIME NO.274/14 OF AYIROOR POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF 2ND RESPONDENT FILED BEFORE FAMILY COURT, ATTINGAL ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.1.2017 RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES -----------------------** ## **NIL** **/TRUE COPY/** **VPS PS TO JUDGE** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J ---------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.1116 of 2017** **----------------------------------------Dated this the 20th day of February, 2017** ## **O R D E R** - 1.This petition is filed under Section 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.On the basis of the information furnished by the 2[nd] respondent, Crime No.274 of 2014 of the Ayiroor Police Station was registered against the petitioners and investigation was taken up for offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447, 427, 294(b) & 506(i) read with 149 of the IPC, and on its completion final report has been laid before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Varkala and the same is now pending as C.C. No.578 of 2014. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that the petitioners in furtherance of their common object formed themselves Crl.M.C.1116/2017 2 into an unlawful assembly and trespassed into the residential compound of the 2[nd] respondent abused and criminally intimated her. - 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits - that the 1[st] petitioner is the brother-in-law of the 2[nd] respondent and other petitioners are his near relatives. - 5.The proceedings are sought to be quashed on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties. The learned counsel appearing for the parties submits that in view of the resolution of the disputes, the proceedings before the criminal court is a futile exercise. Much reliance is placed on the affidavit sworn to by the 2[nd] respondent to buttress their submissions. - 6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions expresses her reservations in the matter. However, it is submitted that the petitioners are not persons with criminal antecedents. - 7.I have considered the submissions. Crl.M.C.1116/2017 3 8.The position with regard to quashing of proceedings on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties is by now well settled. In **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab** [(2012) 10 SCC 303] the 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 466, the pertinent observations which are as under: Crl.M.C.1116/2017 4 ## _XXXXXXXXXXX_ _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. 11.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of Crl.M.C.1116/2017 5 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-A1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as C.C. No.578 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Varkala are quashed. **Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE** vps