Vidyam and others v. State of Kerala and others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V TUESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 8078 OF 2019`** ``` AGAINSTSTNO.9/2019OFGRAMANYAYALAYA,MATHILAKAM ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 61 :`** ``` 1VIDYAM., AGED41YEARS W/O.RAJMOHAN,AMBATHOUSE,PERINJANAMDESOM, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680686. 2LOVELY, AGED45YEARS W/O.DINESH,KOTTUKKALHOUSE,CHENDRAPPINNIDESOM, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680687. 3SARITHAT.G., AGED44YEARS W/O.SURESH,POTTEKKATTHOUSE,THALIKULAMDESOM, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680569. 4MALINIT., AGED50YEARS W/O.VIJAYARAGHAVAN,D1SURABHIAPPARTMENT, - KUNNATHUMANALANE,THRISSUR(DIST.)680001. 5HITHAC.S., AGED45YEARS W/O.VIGI,CHENDRAHOUSE,P.O.ALAPAD, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680641. 6BINDUK.D., AGED49YEARS W/O.SUNIL,EREZHATHYUHOUSE,P.O.PULLOOT, - KODUNGALLUR,THRISSUR(DIST.)680663. 7GIJI, AGED42YEARS W/O.MANOJ,KONAMPARAMBATHHOUSE,P.O.EDAMUTTAM, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680568. 8FREENAFRANCISP., AGED42YEARS W/O.JACKSON,CHEMMANNURHOUSE, - ELTHURUTHP.O.,THRISSUR(DIST.)680611. ``` ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 2 ``` |`9`|`SEEJA C.T.,`| |---|---| ||`AGED 45 YEARS`| ||`W/O.JOFIN THERATTIL, THERATTIL PAYANKAN HOUSE,`| ||`HAIL MERY BAZAR ARANATTUKARA,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 618.`| |`10`|`SAJEENA,`| ||`AGED 44 YEARS`| ||`W/O.MUHAMMAD SHUKKOOR, KOLLIYIL HOUSE,`| ||`ABDULLAH ROAD, MADAVANA, ERIYAD VILLAGE,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 666.`| |`11`|`SEEMA SANTHOSH,`| ||`AGED 43 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SANTHOSH BABU, CHOLAYIL ILLAM, SARDAR ROAD,`| ||`EDAMUTTAM, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 568.`| |`12`|`SARITHA,`| ||`AGED 41 YEARS`| ||`W/O.BAIJU, ERUMATHURUTHI HOUSE, PANANGAD,`| ||`S.N.PURAM, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 665.`| |`13`|`SAPNA,`| ||`AGED 45 YEARS`| ||`W/O.ULLAS, SRUTHI, VADAPARAMBIL HOUSE,`| ||`EDAKULAM, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 688.`| |`14`|`LATHIKA K.K.,`| ||`AGED 50 YEARS`| ||`W/O.JAYAN, THEKKEPANAKKAL HOUSE,`| ||`NATTIKA BEACH, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 566.`| |`15`|`RAMANI,`| ||`AGED 47 YEARS`| ||`W/O.VENUGOPAL, MULLAPPILLIL HOUSE, PANANGAD (P.O.),`| ||`S.N.PURAM, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 665.`| |`16`|`SUJANAN,`| ||`AGED 46 YEARS`| ||`W/O.MUHAMMAD KASIM, RAZAK MANZIL HOUSE,`| ||`SHASTHRI NAGAR, NADATHARA (P.O.)`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 751.`| ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 3 ``` ``` 17MINIBHASK.B., AGED54YEARS,W/O.VALSAN,KURUMBILAVU, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680564. 18RADHIKESWARIM.P., AGED47YEARS W/O.AJITHKUMAR,SOUPARNIKA,MATHILMOOLA, - MATHILAKAM,THRISSUR(DIST.)680685. 19SHEEJASUDEVAN, AGED53YEARS W/O.SUDEVAN,KOLLARAHOUSE,EDATHIRUHI, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680703. 20MANILAA.MENON, AGED49YEARS W/O.SATHEESKUMAR,MANNATHAMPARAMBATHHOUSE, - VALAPPAD,THRISSUR(DIST.)680567. 21VASAK., AGED55YEARS W/O.KRISHNANUNNI,PURAKKOTTHOUSE,VALAPPADP.O., - NATTIKA,THRISSUR(DIST.)680566. 22HEMARAJAN, AGED48YEARS W/O.GOPINATH,UNITHIRIPARAMBILHOUSE,P.O.PANANGAD, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680665. 23SEEMAK.S., AGED49YEARS W/O.RAMACHANDRAN,KAIMAPARAMBILHOUSE, - PERINJANAM,THRISSUR(DIST.)680686. 24MINU, AGED44YEARS W/O.RAJAGOPAL,PALLIYILHOUSE,KANJANI, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680612. 25NEENAMOLP.B., AGED50YEARS W/O.RAJEEV,KAIMDATHILHOUSE,CHERAYIP.O., - ERNAKULAM(DIST.)683514. ``` ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 4 ``` |`26`|`VALSA,`| |---|---| ||`AGED 51 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SAIMON ITTOOP, VALIYAVEETTIL HOUSE,`| ||`CHENDRAPPINNI, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 687.`| |`27`|`RADHA K.N.,`| ||`AGED 44 YEARS`| ||`W/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, VAZHAPPULLI HOUSE,`| ||`KAZHIMBRAM, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 568.`| |`28`|`KALA K.S.,`| ||`AGED 41 YEARS`| ||`W/O.RANJITH KUMAR, KANDENGATTIL HOUSE,`| ||`SUHARA APPARTMENT, CHENDRAPPINNI,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 687.`| |`29`|`SUJA P.A.,`| ||`AGED 46 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SHYAM, NADUVALAPPIL HOUSE, CHETTIPARAMBU,`| ||`IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 121.`| |`30`|`SARIKA,`| ||`AGED 43 YEARS`| ||`W/O.VIPIN, KOMBATH HOUSE, PULLUR,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 683.`| |`31`|`LEENA SAJEEVAN,`| ||`AGED 46 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SAJEEVAN, VALLOOPARAMBIL HOUSE,`| ||`EDATHIRINJI, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 569.`| |`32`|`ANU,`| ||`AGED 47 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SHAJI, THURUTHIYIL HOUSE, KARAMUKKU,`| ||`KANDASSAMKADAVU, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 613.`| |`33`|`VIJAYALAKSHMI P.,`| ||`AGED 47 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SHAJI, SARAYU, S.N.ROAD,`| ||`VADAKKUMPURAM P.O., NORTH PARAVUR,`| ||`ERNAKULAM (DIST.) - 683 521.`| ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 5 ``` |`34`|`MINI ASHOK,`| |---|---| ||`AGED 48 YEARS`| ||`W/O.ASHOK KUMAR, VALLOOKATTIL HOUSE,`| ||`PAZHUVIL WEST, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 564.`| |`35`|`SHEEJA NASAR,`| ||`AGED 45 YEARS`| ||`W/O.NASAR, ARAKKAVEETTIL HOUSE, THALIKULAM,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 569.`| |`36`|`SHOBANA C.,`| ||`AGED 38 YEARS`| ||`W/O.BAIJU, NELLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHANPEEDIKA,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 642.`| |`37`|`KANAKA KUMARI T.V.,`| ||`AGED 53 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SAJEEV, MARATH HOUSE, IRINJALAKUDA,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 125.`| |`38`|`SNEHA SAJEEVAN,`| ||`AGED 48 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SAJEEVAN, PARAPARAMBIL HOUSE,`| ||`CHENDRAPPINNI, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 687.`| |`39`|`ANUJA,`| ||`AGED 37 YEARS`| ||`W/O.LOUIE, PULIKKAN HOUSE, KALAMURI,`| ||`KAIPAMANGALAM, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 681.`| |`40`|`JOJI @`<br>`J.J.KOTTURAN,`| ||`AGED 55 YEARS`| ||`W/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, AINIKKAL HOUSE,`| ||`IRINGALAKKUDA, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 121.`| |`41`|`SHEEJU K.R.,`| ||`AGED 50 YEARS`| ||`W/O.RAJEEVAN, VADASSERI HOUSE, ARIPPALAM,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 688.`| |`42`|`SHIBA,`| ||`AGED 46 YEARS`| ||`W/O.VINOD, KATTIKULAM HOUSE, CHELOOR,`| ||`IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR (DIST.).`| ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 6 ``` - `43 RATHY K.M., AGED 48 YEARS W/O.NANDAKUMAR, KUZHUPPILLI MADOM, CHATHAKKUDAM, -` - `P.O.VALLACHIRA, THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 562.` - `44 SREEKALA, AGED 40 YEARS W/O.SUNIL KUMAR, ULLATTIL HOUSE, KOTHAKULAM P.O.VALAPPAD, -` - `THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 567.` - `45 SUCY, AGED 45 YEARS W/O.SIJU, NEELANKAVIL HOUSE, PAZHUVIL, -` - `THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 564.` - `46 DINESH P.B., AGED 47 YEARS S/O.BHASKARAN, PARATHOOKKAM PARAMBIL HOUSE, SAPHALAYAM, VADAKKUMURI (PO), CHEMMAPPILLY, -` - `THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 570.` - `47 LEELAVATHY P., AGED 49 YEARS W/O.RAVI KUMAR, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, THIRUVANCHIKKULAM, -` - `KODUNGALLUR P.O., THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 664.` - `48 SANDHYA GIREESH, AGED 48 YEARS W/O.GIREESH, PETTEKKATTU HOUSE, P.O.MANALOOR, -` - `THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 617.` - `49 VANAJABAI, AGED 55 YEARS W/O.THAMBI, VALLATH HOUSE, EDATHIRUTHI, -` - `THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 703.` - `50 SHEENA JOSEPH, AGED 51 YEARS W/O.SHAJU KORATH, PLAKKAL HOUSE, GRACE PARK, II D-2 APARTMENT, KOORKKANCHERI, -` - `THRISSUR (DIST.) 680 007.` ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 7 ``` |`51`|`LEENA M.P.,`| |---|---| ||`AGED 52 YEARS`| ||`W/O.VENU, KOLAMVEETTIL HOUSE,`| ||`CHENDRAPPINNI, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 687.`| |`52`|`BHAGYA LAKSHMI,`| ||`AGED 49 YEARS`| ||`W/O.ASHOKAN, AATTUPURATH HOUSE,`| ||`PERUMBULLISSERY, CHERPPU, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 561.`| |`53`|`RAJANI,`| ||`AGED 50 YEARS`| ||`W/O.ASHOK, KOMATHU KATTIL HOUSE, CHAZHOOR,`| ||`PERINGOTTUKARA, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 561.`| |`54`|`VIJITHA K.V.,`| ||`AGED 46 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SANTHOSH KUMAR, EYYANITHARA HOUSE,`| ||`NATTIKA, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 566.`| |`55`|`ASHARANI,`| ||`AGED 49 YEARS`| ||`W/O.SANTHOSH KUMAR, VETTIYARA HOUSE,`| ||`CHENDRAPPINNI, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 687.`| |`56`|`SUSHAMA,`| ||`AGED 53 YEARS`| ||`W/O.BABURAJ, KANNANAMKULAM HOUSE, CHENDRAPPINNI,`| ||`THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 687.`| |`57`|`VALSA RAJU,`| ||`AGED 55 YEARS`| ||`W/O.RAJU, KOTTURAN HOUSE, NR.COURT,`| ||`IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR (DIST.) - 680 121.`| |`58`|`THARA K.,`| ||`AGED 51 YEARS`| ||`W/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, KAYAMPILLI HOUSE, NANDANAM,`| ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 8 ``` ``` KIZHAKKUMURI,PERINGOTTUKARA, - THRISSUR(DIST.)680571. ``` ``` 59MADHUKUMAR, AGED50YEARS S/O.RAGHAVAN,ADIKKAYILHOUSE,POTHANI, - EDATHIRINJI,THRISSUR(DIST.)680122. 60DEEPA, AGED50YEARS W/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN,VATHAYATTHOUSE, - KONATHUKUNNU,THRISSUR(DIST.)680123. 61UNNIKRISHNANV.V., AGED52YEARS W/O.UNNIRIKKUTTY,VAZHAPPULLIHOUSE, - KAZHIMBRAM,THRISSUR(DIST.)680568. BYADVK.DEEPA(PAYYANUR) ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS :`** ``` 1THESTATEOFKERALA REP.BYPUBLICPROSECUTOR, - HIGHCOURTOFKERALA,ERNAKULAM31. ``` ``` 2C.V.SUBHASH, 55YEARS,S/O.VELYUDHAN,CHARUVILHOUSE, VADAKKUMMURI,PERINGOTTUKARA,THRISSUR(DIST.), SECRETARY,S.N.EDUCATIONALCULTURALTRUST, - CHENDRAPPINNI,THRISSUR(DIST)680687. ``` ``` 3SUNITHA, 45YEARS,W/O.DAYANANDAN,AMBADIHOUSE, MAVELIPURAM,THRISSUR(DIST),PRINCIPAL, S.N.VIDYABHAVANSCHOOL,CHENDRAPPINNI, - THRISSUR(DIST)680687. ``` ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 9 ``` ``` 4ROHINIJAYARAM, 63YEARS,W/O.JAYARAM, PANIKKASSERYHOUSE,NEARCIOFFICE, - KODUNGALLUR,THRISSUR(DIST)680664. BYADVS. P.K.RAVISANKAR SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN SMT.PREETHIRAMAKRISHNAN(P-212) SRI.PRATAPABRAHAMVARGHESE SRI.T.C.KRISHNA SRI.C.ANILKUMAR SMT.ASHAK.SHENOY SRI.M.P.PRASHANTH,PUBLICPROSECUTOR ``` ``` THISCRIMINALMISC.CASEHAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON 27.06.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYPASSEDTHEFOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` **==> picture [17 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** ## **ORDER** This petition is filed invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. The petitioners herein are accused in S.T. No.9/2019 on the files of the Gram Nyayalaya, Mathilakam. In the aforesaid case, they are accused of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 143 and 342 read with Section 149 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution allegation is that on 09.10.2018, the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and, in furtherance of their common intention, wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and two others in the office room of the defacto complainant and thus committed the offence. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that this Court had directed the parties to undergo mediation, and pursuant to the same, a memorandum of agreement has been executed, ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 11 ``` as per which the entire disputes have been resolved. In terms of the mediation agreement entered between the parties, separate affidavits shall be filed by the party respondents asserting that they have no further grievances. According to the learned counsel, if the proceedings are terminated, recording the amicable settlement, the parties can embark upon their future paths in an atmosphere of tranquility and mutual respect. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on the basis of the settlement. He argues that the facts and circumstances may not warrant the exercise of the court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, it is fairly submitted that there have been no other crimes of serious nature registered against the petitioners to date. It is further submitted that the statements of the party respondents have been recorded, and they have unequivocally stated that they do not have any lasting grievances. 6. I have considered the submissions and have gone ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 12 ``` through the records. 7. In **State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan,[1]** , a three-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has summarized the law as laid down in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab[2]** , **Narinder Singh v. State** **of Punjab[3]** and in subsequent cases. It was laid down as under: 15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under: - 15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 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; - 15.2. 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; > 1 [(2019) 5 SCC 688] > 2 (2012) 10 SCC 303 > 3 2014 (6) SCC 466 ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 13 ``` - 15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the 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; 15.4. Offences under Section 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 Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 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 Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 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 Section 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/delicate 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 ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 14 ``` 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 paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove; 15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offenses, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact 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. Having carefully analyzed the prayer sought for in the light of the principles laid down as above and also the nature of the allegations, the gravity of the offense, the antecedents of the accused, and the amicable relationship that now exists between the parties, I am of the considered opinion that quashing the proceedings on the basis of ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 15 ``` the settlement will not have any adverse impact on society. In fact, it would only serve to bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Additionally, persisting with the prosecution would be a waste of time, as the prospects of conviction are bleak. In light of all of the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court would be well justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings Resultantly, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-III Final Report in Crime No.34/2018 of Kaipamangalam Police Station and all further proceedings against the petitioners pending as S.T. No.9/2019 on the file of the Gram Nyayalaya, Mathilakam, are quashed. Sd/- ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE** NS ``` CRL.MCNO.8078OF2019 ``` ``` 16 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8078/2019`** ``` PETITIONERANNEXURES: ``` ``` ANNEXUREI ``` ``` TRUECOPYOFTHEFIROFCRIMENO.34/2018OF THEKAIPAMANGALAMPOLICESTATION,THRISSUR RURAL. ``` ``` ANNEXUREIITRUECOPYOFTHEMEMOOFEVIDENCEANDTHE161 STATEMENTSOFWITNESSESOFCRIMENO.34/2018OF THEKAIPAMANGALAMPOLICESTATION,THRISSUR RURAL. ``` ``` ANNEXUREIIITRUECOPYOFTHEFINALREPORTOFCRIME NO.34/2018OFTHEKAIPAMANGALAMPOLICE STATION,THRISSURRURAL. ``` ``` ANNEXUREIVTRUECOPYOFTHEJUDGMENTDATED15/11/2018IN W.P.(C)NO.25048/2018OFTHISHON'BLECOURT. ```