Kerala High Court
Asharaf C vs State Of Kerala on 4 July, 2016
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY,THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2016/13TH ASHADHA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 3868 of 2016 ()
--------------------------------------
CC 1727/2014 of C.J.M.,THALASSERY
CRIME NO. 826/2014 OF CHAKKARAKKAD POLICE SATION , KANNUR
------------------------------
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------
ASHARAF C.
AGED:28 YEARS, S/O MOIDU, VAZHAYIL HOUSE,
KANAYANNUR, IRIVERI PO, IRIVERI VILLAGE,
KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670613
BY ADVS.SRI.ABU MATHEW
SRI.AJU MATHEW
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-682031
2. SIRAJ C.C.
AGED:33 EYARS, S/O MOIDU,
VAZHAYIL HOUSE, KANAYANNUR AMSAM,
MUTTILECHIRA, IRIVERI PO, IRIVERI VILLAGE,
KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670613
3. NAZEERA C.C
AGED:28 YEARS, W/O FAIZAL, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, KANAYANNUR AMSAM,
MUTTILECHIRA, IRIVERI PO, IRIVERI VILLAGE,
KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670613
R2 &R3 BY ADV. SRI.VINUCHAND
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
AD
Crl.MC.No. 3868 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------------
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 826/14 OF
CHAKKARAKKALLU POLICE STATION SUBMITTED BEFORE
THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY
ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT ALONG WITH MEMO
OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO 826/14 OF CHAKKARAKKALLU
POLICE STATION FIELD IN CC NO. 1727/14 ON THE FILE OF
THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY
ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT
ANNEXURE A4 AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/CW-2
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------------------------
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
AD
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C. No. 3868 of 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated 4th July, 2016
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ORDER
1.The petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C.No.1727 of 2014 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery. Aforesaid case has arisen from Crime No.826 of 2014 of Chakkarakkallu Police Station registered at the instance of the 2nd respondent herein alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 461 of the IPC. The 3rd respondent is the victim. Incidentally, respondents 2 and 3 are siblings of the petitioner.
2.This petition is preferred under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure banking on the ratio of the Judgment rendered by the Three - Judge Bench of the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab ( 2012 (4) KLT 108) and a series of other cases which include Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr. (2014) 6 SCC 466) and Yogendra Yadav and others V State Crl.M.C. No.3868 of 2016 -2- of Jharkhand (2014 (9) SCC 653 ) with a prayer to quash the proceedings. The sole ground is that the Apex Court in the above judgments have delineated the circumstances and the cases in which inherent powers under Section 482 can be invoked de hors section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for recognizing out of court settlement for the purpose of quashing criminal proceedings.
3.The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner had taken away some gold ornaments and cash kept in the table drawer of the de facto complainant and committed the offence.
4.It is submitted that the parties have reached an out of court settlement and there is no acrimony between them at present. They have agreed to start afresh and to live in peace and harmony. The pendency of the criminal proceeding will hinder their cordial relationship in no small measure. To bring on record the settlement, respondents Crl.M.C. No.3868 of 2016 -3- have filed separate affidavits wherein they state in unequivocal terms that they have pardoned the petitioners and reiterates that they have no objection in terminating the proceedings.
5.The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is not a person with criminal antecedents.
6.I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made across the bar and I have also gone through the materials on record.
7.It appears that the offence is entirely personal in nature and do not affect public peace or tranquility. It is also felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace. In a case such as the instant one, even if the prosecution is allowed to continue, it would not serve any purpose as the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It can only result in putting the de facto complainant and the accused to Crl.M.C. No.3868 of 2016 -4- unwanted oppression and prejudice. Settlement will augur well for the interest of the community and will enable the parties to live in peace and harmony.
8.I am of the view that this Court is well justified in quashing the impugned proceedings as the instant case falls within the matrix of guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Gian Singh (Supra) and the other cases referred to above.
In the result, this petition is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.1727 of 2014 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery shall stand quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE kp/-4.7.16