Kerala High Court
Swaraj vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2017
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/4TH PHALGUNA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 9053 of 2016 ()
---------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 1050/2013 of ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT
SESSIONS COURT II, THRISSUR
CRIME NO. 297/2013 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2::
---------------------------------
1. SWARAJ, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.APPU, PALLARA HOUSE,
PALUVAY DESOM, THAIKAD VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680506.
2. ABHIRAJ, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.APPU, PALLARA HOUSE,
PALUVAY DESOM, THAIKAD VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680506.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED
SMT.K.M.SAJINA
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT THROUGH
THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM.
2. NAVAS @ ABDUL RAHMAN
AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.SIDHEEQ, VALIYAKATH HOUSE,
PALUVAY, THAIKAD VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT- 680506.
3. SELVAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.DURHIRAJ, MARUTHUR HOUSE,
PALUVAY, THAIKAD VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680506.
R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.C.R.REKHESH SHARMA
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23-02-2017, ALONG WITH CRMC. 9055/2016, CRMC. 9058/2016, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 9053 of 2016 ()
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
ANNEXURE-A1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.297/2013 OF
CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-A2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME
NO.297/2013 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-A3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT REGARDING SETTLEMENT
SIGNED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE-A4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT REGARDING SETTLEMENT
SIGNED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
-----------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P. A. TO JUDGE
Pn
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
-------------------------------------------
Crl. M. C. Nos. 9053, 9058 & 9055 of 2016
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2017
O R D E R
The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.297/2013 and 299/2013 of Chavakkad Police Station. The petitioners in Crl.M.C. No.9053/2016 and 9058/2016 are the accused in Crime No.297/2013 for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 308 read with 34 of IPC. In that crime, the allegation of the defacto complainant was that, on 13.02.2013 at 8.00 p.m., while the accused Nos.1 to 4 were assaulting one Shyam, the defacto complainant intervened and accused Nos. 1 to 4 assaulted both of them with iron rod and stick. They also caused injuries on the head and other parts of the body. Alleging that the offences were committed with the intention of causing the death of the victims, FIS was laid and after investigation final report was filed as S.C. No.1050/2013, which is now pending before the Additional Assistant Sessions Court II, Thrissur. Since some of the accused did not appear at the time of committal, the case against them was split up and is now pending as L.P. No.2/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavakkad.
Crl. M. C. Nos. 9053, 9258 & 9055 of 2016 2
2. In Crime No.299/2013, the allegation of the defacto complainant is that, on the same day and time the accused attacked the defacto complainant and others, due to previous enmity and caused bodily injuries. Crime was registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 447, 308 read with 149 of IPC. FIS was laid and after investigation final report was filed. The matter is now pending as S.C.No.681/2013 of the Additional Assistant Sessions Court-1, Thrissur. The petitioners in Crl.M.C. No.9055/2016 are the accused in the above crime.
3. Both the parties have now approached this Court contending that the disputes between the parties have been completely resolved to their satisfaction and that the respective defacto complainants do not propose to pursue the matter. Affidavits have been filed by the respondents who are the defacto complainants and the injured in both cases. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents in both cases, relying on the affidavits reiterated the settlement arrived at between the parties and also that they do not have any intention to pursue the matter. It is also submitted that they have been adequately compensated for Crl. M. C. Nos. 9053, 9258 & 9055 of 2016 3 the acts done by the respective accused. It is in the nature of case and counter case, since the accused in one batch of case along with the others stand as the defacto complainant in the other case.
4. It is true that, an offence under Section 308 has been alleged in Crime No.297/2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before me the wound certificate in relation to the injured in both cases. The defacto complainant in Crime No.297/2013 had sustained a lacerated injury on the scalp which is likely to make the allegation against the petitioners aggravated. However, in Crime No.299/2013 very serious injuries are not seen inflicted.
5. In the light of the above, invocation of an offence under Section 308 IPC cannot be completely ruled out. However, it seems that the injured have now condoned the conduct of the petitioners herein. Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the accused are not involved in any other crime and statements of the respective defacto complainants/victims have been recorded wherein they have asserted that the matter has been settled. It was also submitted by the learned counsel Crl. M. C. Nos. 9053, 9258 & 9055 of 2016 4 for the respective accused that the accused has assured to lead a peaceful life in future and has ensured that they did not get involved in any other criminal case. On the basis of this and also considering the fact that they are not involved in any other crime earlier, especially the fact that the present incident do not appear to be one arising out of a premeditated calculated act. I am inclined to accept the settlement arrived at between the parties and to quash the entire proceedings to permit the parties to lead a peaceful life.
In the result, Crl.M.Cs. are allowed and all further proceedings in Crime Nos.297/2013 and 299/2013 of Chavakkad Police Station stand quashed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.
Pn