High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeCrl.M.C allowed; FIR and final report and all f...

Vishnu and others v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C No. 6689 of 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C. S. Dias
Judgment Date
2024-03-19
Court Decision / Holding
Crl.M.C allowed; Annexure-A1 FIR and Annexure-A2 final report and all further proceedings in CC 193/2019 quashed against petitioners.
Final Disposition
Crl.M.C allowed; FIR and final report and all further proceedings quashed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Vishnu
  • Rajesh
  • Arppan Varghese
  • Robin Cherian
  • Aneesh Sam
  • Govind Suresh
  • Aravind Anand

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
  • The Station House Officer, Kurathikadu Police Station
  • Aravind aged 39 years S/O Sasidharan Pillai
  • Devika aged 33 years W/O Aravind

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sarun K. Idicula
  • • S. Sameer

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Christy Thomas
  • • Amani R.S.

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a criminal miscellaneous case under Section 482 CrPC filed by seven accused persons challenging FIR No. 08/2019 of Kurathikadu Police Station and the ensuing proceedings in CC No. 193/2019, before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mavelikkara, Alappuzha. The petitioners—Vishnu, Rajesh, Arppan Varghese, Robin Cherian, Aneesh Sam, Govind Suresh, and Aravind Anand—are alleged to have committed offences under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 294(b), 323, 324, 341 and 427, arising from a 3 January 2019 incident in which they trespassed, abused the complainants, assaulted them and damaged the peace of the defacto complainants’ family. The petition argues this dispute has been amicably settled, with respondents 3 and 4 swearing affidavits (Annexures A3 and A4) stating no objections to quashing; the Investigating Officer confirms the settlement. The State’s counsel and respondents acknowledge the settlement and that there is no subsisting grievance. The court relies on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Parbatbhai Aahir Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat to endorse quashing in the ends of justice where the offences are not serious. After consideration, the judge is satisfied that the matter falls within the exception to the normal course and exercises the inherent power to quash the FIR, final report, and all further proceedings in CC 193/2019, thereby bringing about harmony in society. The order is by Justice C.S. Dias on 19 March 2024.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973IPC sections: 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 294(b), 323, 324, 341, 427

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIRs and proceedings
  • Ends of justice doctrine
  • Amicable settlement as a basis for quashing criminal proceedings when offences are not serious

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners' counsel submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled; Annexures A3-A4 sworn affidavits show no objection to quashing; IO confirms genuineness of settlement; seeks quashing of FIR No. 08/2019 and proceedings.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents' counsel and the Public Prosecutor stated that the subject matter is settled and no subsisting grievance; they supported quashing as appropriate in light of amicable settlement.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab2012 (10) SCC 303PositiveCited to justify quashing where amicable settlement exists and offences are not serious; supports ends of justice as reason to exercise inherent power.
Parbatbhai Aahir Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another(2017) 9 SCC 641PositiveSimilar principle; quashing in light of amicable settlement and non-serious offences.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Vishnu and others v. State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1945 ``` ``` CRL.MC NO. 6689 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.08/2019 OF KURATHIKADU POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER DATED IN CC NO.193 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, MAVELIKKARA ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:`** - **`1 VISHNU AGED 32 YEARS S/O. GOPINATH, VISHNU BHAVANAM, PALLIKAL EAST MURI,THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690107`** - **`2 RAJESH AGED 32 YEARS S/O. KRISHNANKUTTI, RAJESH BHAVANAM, CHUNAKKARA NORTH,CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690534`** - **`3 ARPPAN VARGHESE AGED 24 YEARS S/O. VARGHESE, MEENATHATHIL, PALLIKAL, THEKEKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690107`** - **`4 ROBIN CHERIAN AGED 34 YEARS S/O. DANIEL CHERIAN, MADATHIL HOUSE, PALLIKAL EAST MURI, THEKKEKARA P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT., PIN - 690107`** - **`5 ANEESH SAM AGED 38 YEARS S/O. SAM KOSHY, KANJIRAVILA THEKKATHIL, PALLIKAL EAST MURI,THEKKEKARA P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT., PIN - 690107`** - **`6 GOVIND SURESH AGED 27 YEARS S/O SURESH, PUTHENPURAKKSL HOUSE, PALLIKAL EAST MURI,THEKKEKARA P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. , PIN - 690107`** -:2:- ## Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 ## **`7 ARAVIND ANAND AGED 31 YEARS`** - **`S/O. ANAND, VELIKAKATHU VEETIL, VATHIKULAM MURI, THEKKEKARA P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT., PIN - 690107`** ``` BY ADVS. SARUN K. IDICULA S.SAMEER ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031`** - **`2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION OF KURATHIKADU, KURATHIKADU P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT., PIN - 690503`** - **`3 ARAVIND AGED 39 YEARS S/O. SASIDHARAN PILLAI, PATHIYARETHU HOUSE, PALLIKKAL EAST MURI,THEKKEKARA VILLAGE,MAVELIKARA, ALLAPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690107`** - **`4 DEVIKA AGED 33 YEARS`** - **`W/O. ARAVIND, PATHIYARETHU HOUSE, PALLIKAL EAST MURI, THEKKAKARA P.O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690107`** ``` BY ADVS. CHRISTY THOMAS AMANI R.S.(K/3086/2023) ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ## **`SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK`** ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ``` ``` 19.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 -:3:- Dated this the 19[th] day of March, 2024 ## **O R D E R** The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, to quash Annexure-A1 First Information Report [FIR] and Annexure-A2 Final report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.193/2019 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Mavelikkara, Alappuzha. 2. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 7 in Crime No.08/2019 of the Kurathikkadu Police Station, Alappuzha, registered against them at the instance of the third respondent, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 294(b), 323, 324, 341 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code,1860. 3. The crux of the prosecution is that: on Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 ## -:4:- 03.01.2019, the accused trespassed into the courtyard of the defacto complainant and questioned them. Thereafter, the accused abused the defacto complainant, threw a stone on them, and assaulted and slapped the defacto complainant. When the wife of the defacto complainant intervened, they also attacked her. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 4. Heard; Sri.Sarun K. Idicula, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. C.S. Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. Christy Thomas, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioners and the respondents 3 and 4 has been amicably settled out of court, and the respondents 3 Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 ## -:5:- and 4 have voluntarily executed Annexure A3 and A4 affidavits, stating that they have no objection and in all further proceedings in the above crime being quashed. Hence, the petition may be allowed. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Investigating Officer has ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the parties has been settled and the respondents 3 and 4 have voluntarily executed Annexure-A3 and A4 affidavits. 7. The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the respondents 3 and 4 have no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners. The said submission is recorded. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab** [2012 (10) SCC 303] and **Prabatbhai** Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 ## -:6:- **Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of Gujarat and another** [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that in the facts and circumstances of a case and to secure the ends of justice, where the High Court is satisfied that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and the offences are not serious in nature involving mental depravity, criminal proceedings may be quashed. 9. On a consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials on record, especially after going through Annexure-A3 and A4 affidavits sworn in by the respondents 3 and 4, which have been found to be genuine and bona fide by the Investigating Officer, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court, particularly since the alleged offences are not serious in nature, no public interest is involved, the -:7:- ## Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 chances of conviction is remote, the continuation of the proceeding would only be wastage of judicial time and the settlement would augur harmony in society. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition. In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Annexure-A1 First Information Report and Annexure A2 Final report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.193/2019 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Mavelikkara, Alappuzha, as against the petitioners. The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly. Sd/- **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** mtk/19.03.24 Crl.M.C.No.6689 of 2023 -:8:- ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6689/2023`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1FIR IN CRIME NO.08/2019 OF KURATHIKADU P.S DATED 04-01-2019 ANNEXURE 2FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.08/2019 DATED 30-01-2019 ANNEXURE 3AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 3RD RESPONDENT 06- 06-2023 ANNEXURE 4AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 06-06-2023 ```