Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 4]

Kerala High Court

Dr.Victor J. Fernandes vs Sunny J. Fernandes on 21 December, 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

   WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

                     Crl.MC.No. 2793 of 2015 ()
                     ---------------------------


           AGAINST  OP 25/2008 of PRL.M.C.,NEYYATTINKARA

           AGAINST CC 607/2011 of J.F.C.M-I,NEYYATINKARA

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 AND 2:
---------------------------------

          1. DR.VICTOR J. FERNANDES
            S/O.K.J.FERNANDES, VICTOR VILLA,
            NADOOR KOLLA, KOLLAYIL VILLAGE,
            AMARAVILA PO,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

          2. N.BENSER
            S/O.NELSON,
            PUTHUKULANGARA VEEDU, KEZHKOLLA,
            AMARAVILA PO,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM


            BY ADVS.SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI
                    SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
----------------------------------

          1. SUNNY J. FERNANDES
            S/O.FERNANDES, SAROVARAM,
            ARSHA NAGAR 13, SANGEETHA JUNCTION,
            KAVANAD PO, KOLLAM

          2. STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM.


            R1  BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS (SR.)
            R1  BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEDEV
            R1 BY SRI.P.PRATHEESH
            BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI

       THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD  ON  21-
12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 2793 of 2015 ()
---------------------------

                              APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES
-----------------------
ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE WILL DTD.03.04.2008 EXECUTED BY THE
            MOTHER OF THE 1ST PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT

ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD. 04.01.2008 ISSUED BY THE
            1ST RESPONDENT

ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE VAKALATH FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER AND
            1ST RESPONDENT IN SUCCESSION OP.25/2008 BEFORE THE
            MUNSIFF COURT, NEYYATTINKARA

ANNEXURE D: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT IN CC.NO.607/2011
            OF THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE I,
            NEYYATTINAKRA

ANNEXURE E: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO.298/10 ON THE FILE
            OF SUB COURT, NEYYATTINKARA

ANNEXURE F: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS NO.107/2013 OF MUNSIFF
            COURT, NEYYATTINKARA

ANNEXURE G: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1162/13 OF PARASALA
            POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE H: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REFER REPORT IN CRIME NO.1162/13 OF
            PARASALA POLICCE STATION

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES
-----------------------
ANNEXURE E: NOTARISED AFFIDAVIT DTD 2.12.2016 SWORN BY THE 1ST
            RESPONDENT

                                                          /TRUE COPY/


VPS                                                       PS TO JUDGE



              RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J
           ----------------------------------------
                 Crl.M.C. No.2793 of 2015
          -----------------------------------------
      Dated this the 21st day of December, 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 accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C. No.607 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Neyyattinkara. In the aforesaid case they face indictment under sections 468, 471, 474 and 420 read with 34 of the IPC.

3.The prosecution allegation is that the 1st petitioner herein filed a petition seeking for the issuance of a succession certificate with the assistance of the 2nd petitioner after forging the signature of the 1st respondent, who is the Crl.M.C. 2793/2015 2 brother of the 1st petitioner. According to the prosecution the same was done with intent to cheat and to cause pecuniary loss to the 1st respondent.

4.Heard the submissions advanced.

5.It is submitted that in the course of the proceedings the matter was referred to the Kerala High Court Mediation Centre and the parties being brothers decided to bury the hatchet. The memorandum of agreement has been executed evidencing the settlement. Affidavit is also sworn to by the 1st respondent before this Court wherein he asserts that he has no objection in allowing this petition and terminating the proceedings as against the petitioners.

6.I have considered the submissions .

7.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 Crl.M.C. 2793/2015 3 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."

8.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC 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 Crl.M.C. 2793/2015 4
(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

9.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 conviction would be bleak.

10.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.

Crl.M.C. 2793/2015 5 In the result, this petition will stand allowed. All proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners in C.C. No.607 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Neyyattinkara are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE vps