Varadarajan and others v. State of Kerala and Mani and Jayanthi

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** **THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/24TH MAGHA, 1935** ## **Crl.MC.No. 1039 of 2014 ()** **--------------------------CC.NO. 1066/2012 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I,THRISSUR CRIME NO. 793/2011 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION , THRISSUR DISTRICT** ## **---------------------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:** **------------------------------------------** ## **1. VARADARAJAN, AGED 42 YEARS,** - **S/O.MARUTHACHALAM, 422/1, NALLARVAYAL, SAPPANIMADAI, KARUNYA COLLEGE, COIMBATORE.** **2. SIVAKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.MARUTHACHALAM, 422/1, NALLARVAYAL, SAPPANIMADAI, KARUNYA COLLEGE, COIMBATORE.** **3. SOMASUNDARAM ALIAS SOMU, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.PAZHANISWAMY, 21, GIRITHUPALLAM, ALANDURAI, COIMBATORE.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SAILESH (KECHERY)** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:** **------------------------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VIYYUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-31** **2. MANI,S/O.MARUTHACHALAM, THRIKKALAMTHOTTAM, GRAMALADESOM, KILLANNUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR.PIN-680 001** **3. JAYANTHI,W/O.MANI, THRIKKALAMTHOTTAM, GRAMAL DESOM, KILLANNUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR.PIN-680 001** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE.P. R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts** **Crl.MC.No. 1039 of 2014 () ----------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:** **---------------------------------------------** **ANNEX I- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN B.A.NO.8977 OF 2011 DT. 02 JANUARY 2012. ANNEX IITRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.793 OF 2011 DATED 22.8.2011 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION.** ## **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:** ## **NIL** ## **/TRUE COPY/** **P.A.TO.JUDGE** **sts** K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. ----------------------------------------------------------------Crl. M.C. No.1039 of 2014 -----------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 13[th] day of February, 2014 ## O R D E R This criminal miscellaneous case is filed by accused Nos. 1 to 3 in C.C.1066/12 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur, to quash the proceedings, recording the composition entered into between the petitioners and the defacto-complainant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the 'Code'). 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioners are the accused in Crime No.793/2011 of Viyyur Police Station, which was registered on the basis of the statement given by the 2[nd] respondent, against the petitioners alleging offences under Section 341, 325 and 452 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. During 2 Crl. M.C. No.1039 of 2014 investigation, it was revealed that offences under Section 452 and 325 were not committed instead of offences under Section 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code were committed and so Section 452 and 325 of Indian Penal Code were deleted and Section 326 and 323 of Indian Penal Code were added. After investigation, final report was filed and the case has been taken on the file as C.C.No.1066/2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur, where it is now pending. The injured in this case are relatives of the accused persons. The matter has been settled between the parties. Since some of the offences are non-compoundable in nature, the same cannot be compounded before the court in which it was pending. So they have no other option but to approach this court for quashing the proceedings, after recording the composition under Section 482 of the 'Code'. 3 Crl. M.C. No.1039 of 2014 3. Respondents 2 and 3 appeared through counsel and submitted that, the matter has been settled and they are living in cordial terms and they do not want to proceed with the prosecution. As directed by this court, the learned Public Prosecutor got instructions and submitted that, there is no other case pending against the petitioners and they have no other criminal background as well, but opposed the application to quash the proceedings at this stage. 4. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the 2[nd] respondent, Viyyur police has registered a case as Crime No.793/2011 of Viyyur Police Station, against the present petitioners, originally alleging offences under Section 341, 452 and 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter Section 452 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code were deleted and Section 326 4 Crl. M.C. No.1039 of 2014 and 323 were added. After completing the investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on the file as C.C.1066/2012 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thrissur, and the case is now pending before that court. It is also seen from Annexure-I that anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners in this case. It is also seen from the cause title of the petition that, the petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 are relatives and they have filed a compounding petition before this court, stating that the matter has been settled between them and they are leading a harmonious life now. In the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012(4) KLT 108 (SC)],** the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in family disputes, if the parties have settled the issues, due to the intervention of well-wishers and the family members and does not want to proceeded with the criminal prosecution initiated, then 5 Crl. M.C. No.1039 of 2014 that must be honoured and the prosecution has to be quashed, invoking the power under Section 482 of the Code. From the allegations in the first information statement and also in the final report, it is seen that it is a family dispute and the incident is of personal nature and not having any public interest. The family members have now settled the case and now they are living in harmony. In such cases, this court has to promote that harmony and keeping this case will only affect their cordial relationship. No purpose will be served by allowing the case to continue also because the witnesses are not going to support the case of the prosecution as well. So considering the circumstances and also the dictum laid down in the decision in Gian Singh's case (supra), I feel that it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of the 'Code' has to be invoked to quash the proceedings. So the application is allowed and 6 Crl. M.C. No.1039 of 2014 further proceedings in C.C.1066/2012 (Crime No.793/2011 of Viyyur Police Station) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur, against the petitioners is quashed. With the above direction, this criminal miscellaneous case is disposed of. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court for necessary further action. Sd/K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy // P.A. to Judge ss