Kerala High Court
Habeeb vs The State Of Kerala
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/2ND AGRAHAYANA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 7480 of 2016 ()
---------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 236/2016 of J.M.F.C - III (TEMPORARY SPECIAL
COURT),KOLLAM DATED
CRIME NO. 539/2012 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION , KOLLAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1,3,4:
---------------------------
1. HABEEB
AGED 26, S/O.ABDUL RAHIM,
THOTTAHIL VEEDU, KOTTAMKATA VILLAGE,
KERALAPURAM CHERI, KUMILIYIL JAYANTHY COLONY
KOLLAM DISTRICT.
2. RAMMOHAN
AGED 29, S/O.MOHANKUMAR,
AMBATTU VEEDU, VIKASNAGAR-1, MANAYIL KULANGARA CHERI,
KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
3. PREMLAL
AGED 32, S/O.RAGHUNATHAN,
THODIYIL THEKKETHIL VEEDU,
THANKASSERY KAVAL, P&RA, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
SRI.K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE OF KERALA AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT AND INJURED:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
WEST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM THROUGH THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682301.
2. RATHEESH
AGED 31, S/O.THANKAPPAN PILLAI,
KAYALVARAM PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU,
THEVALLI KAYAL VARAM, MATHILIL CHERRI,
THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-676001.
3. AJAYAN @ SUNIL
AGED 37, S/O.PODIYAN, PUTHUVEL PUTHEN VEEDU,
KAYAL KARAM, THEVALLI, MATHILIL CHERRI,
THRIKKADAVOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-676001.
R2-3 BY ADV. SRI.N.L.BITTO
R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.T.R.RENJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-11-2016,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CONTD...
:2:
Crl.MC.No. 7480 of 2016 ()
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
ANNEXURE 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CR.539/12 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION
DT.9-6-12.
ANNEXURE 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC 236/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
JFCM TEMPORARY KOLLAM DT.19-5-14.
ANNEXURE 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADDL.STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE DE FACTO
COMPLAINANT AND INJURED TO THE INVESTIGATION OFFICER DT.5-7-2012.
ANNEXURE 4 TRUE COPIES OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATES OF THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT
AND INJURED DT.7-6-12.
ANNEXURE 5 A TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER
MATHA HOSPITAL, MATHILIL DT.10-6-16.
ANNEXURE 6 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF SETTLEMENT SWORN BY THE INJURED/R2
HEREIN DT.30-10-2016.
ANNEXURE 7 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF SETTLEMENT SWORN BY THE INJURED/R3
HEREIN DT.30-10-2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
-----------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
SKS
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J
----------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 7480 of 2016
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2016
O R D E R
1.This petition is filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code ) with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings.
2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 in C.C. No. 236 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate (Temporary), Kollam. They stand indicted under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308, 341, 506(i) and 149 of the IPC. The 2nd accused was a juvenile at the time of the commission of the offence and case against him is now pending before Juvenile Justice Board.
3.The prosecution allegation is that, on 06.06.2012 at 10.45 p.m, the accused on account of their previous enmity towards the de facto complainant, wrongfully restrained the Crl.M.C. No. 7480 of 2016 2 respondents 2 and 3 and thereafter assaulted them causing injuries.
4.Heard the submissions advanced.
5.The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. Attention of this Court is invited to the affidavits filed by them to buttress their submission . It is urged that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquillity. Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony.
6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported Crl.M.C. No. 7480 of 2016 3 against the petitioners.
7.I have considered the submissions .
8.In Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows :
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings."
9.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC Crl.M.C. No. 7480 of 2016 4 466, the pertinent observations which are as under:
XXXXXXXXXXXX 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:
(i) ends of justice, or
(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx
10.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society .It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise , persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of Crl.M.C. No. 7480 of 2016 5 conviction would be bleak.
11.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure- A2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as C.C.No. 236 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court (Temporary), Kollam are quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE SKS //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE