Kerala High Court
Xavier vs State Of Kerala on 25 November, 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 4TH AGRAHAYANA,
1942
Crl.Rev.Pet.No.1741 OF 2007
CRA 896/2005 OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II,
ERNAKULAM
CC 394/2001 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOCHI
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
1 XAVIER, S/O PAUL, PALLIPARAMBIL, NEAR PAPPANGA
JUNCTION,, MOOLANKUZHI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE.
2 THANKAMMA, W/O.XAVIER, NEAR PAPPANGA JUNCTION,
MOOLANKUZHI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL
SRI.P.BABU KUMAR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
ADDL. BELLA MARIAM, W/O. ANTONY RUMOLD, AGED 49 YEARS,
R2 ENAMAKKAL HOUSE, MUNDAMVELI P.O., RAMESWARM
VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM.
(ADDITIONAL R2 IS IMPEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
25/11/2020 IN CRL.MA 2/2020)
R2 BY ADV. VISHNU BABU
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.M.S.BREEZ
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 25.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRRP No.1741/2007
..2..
O R D E R
Sri.P.P.Antony, the defacto complainant in this case, expired on 28.08.2017. Subsequent to his death, Smt.Bella Mariam, who is the daughter of late Sri.P.P.Antony, filed Crl.M.Appl. No. 2 of 2020 to implead herself as additional 2nd respondent in this revision petition. A true photocopy of the Death Certificate issued from the Kochi Municipal Corporation is produced along with Crl.M.Appl. No. 2 of 2020, which would show that Sri.P.P.Antony, the defacto complainant in this case, passed away on 28.08.2017. Hence, Crl.M.Appl. No. 2 of 2020 filed to implead the applicant as additional 2nd respondent stands allowed.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on CRRP No.1741/2007 ..3..
11.11.2000 at 8 pm, the 1st accused beat PW1/defacto complainant with a wooden rod on the left leg and then all the accused beat him with wooden rods. The 2nd accused is the wife of the 1st accused and accused 3 and 4 are their children.
3. As accused 3 and 4 were juveniles, their case was sent to the Juvenile Court for trial and disposal. It is alleged that due to the act of the accused, PW1 sustained hurt and grievous hurt and thereby committed the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as, "IPC").
4. Subsequent to the death of the defacto complainant, the additional 2nd respondent, who is the sole legal heir of the defacto complainant, filed Crl.M.Appl.No. 3 of 2020 along with an affidavit before this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal CRRP No.1741/2007 ..4..
Procedure (hereinafter referred to as, "Cr.P.C."), stating that the dispute between the revision petitioners/accused 1 and 2 and the defacto complainant was settled before the death of PW1 and she has, at present, no subsisting grievance against the revision petitioners/accused 1 and 2 and she has no objection to compound the offences involved in this case. According to the additional 2nd respondent, her mother also expired in the year 2003.
5. The offence punishable under Section 326 of the IPC is non compoundable in nature. Hence, it is not possible to compound the offence as contemplated under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. In view of the above circumstances, the additional 2nd respondent filed Crl.M.Appl. No. 3 of 2020 to quash the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioners/accused in accordance with Section CRRP No.1741/2007 ..5..
482 Cr.P.C. It is well settled that High Court can exercise jurisdiction suo motu under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the interest of justice. It can do so while exercising other jurisdictions such as appellate or revisional jurisdiction. No formal application for invoking inherent jurisdiction is necessary. In the case on hand, the offences involved are purely private and personal in nature. No public interest is involved. Under the circumstances, it is well within the domain of this Court to quash the conviction and sentence imposed against the revision petitioners/accused by the trial court as well as the appellate court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, Crl.M.Appl. No. 3 of 2020 stands allowed.
6. In the result, the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court as well as the appellate court stand quashed. The revision CRRP No.1741/2007 ..6..
petitioners/accused 1 and 2 are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.
The revision petition stands disposed of as herein above.
Sd/-
N.ANIL KUMAR JUDGE Bka/-
CRRP No.1741/2007
..7..
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL. APPEAL NO.896/05 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-II), ERNAKULAM DATED 03/03/2007.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CC NO.394/01 PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOCHI DATED 15/10/2005.