Kerala High Court
Vineeth vs Renjith Raju on 21 March, 2014
Author: K. Ramakrishnan
Bench: K.Ramakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2014/25TH ASHADHA, 1936
Crl.MC.No. 1911 of 2014 ()
---------------------------
CC. NO.234/2013 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLLAM.
..........
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4:
-----------------------------------------------------
1. VINEETH, S/O.KRISHNANACHARI,
AGED 26 YEARS, JYOTHI NIVAS,
GANAPATHY NAGAR NO.154, THAMARAKULAM WARD,
KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
2. HARI BOSE, S/O.CHANDRA BOSE,
AGED 23 YEARS, THANGALAZHIKOM PURAYIDOM,
PALLITHOTTAM WARD, NEAR SOOCHIKARAN MUKKU,
SNEHA NAGAR-112, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
3. RAJESH @ REJI, S/O.AMEERUDHEEN,
AGED 29 YEARS, UNNI NIVAS, AIKYA NAGAR,
JONAKAPPURAM SURIYANI PALLI PURAYIDAM,
KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE OR SANCHARI MUKKU,
VADAKKEVILA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
4. ABHILASH @ CHANDRAKUMAR, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN,
AGED 31 YEARS, ABHILASH BHAVAN,
SOUTH MARUTHOORKULANGARA,
AYANI VELIKULANGARA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH SEBASTIAN (KOLLAM).
RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT, CO-INJURED & STATE:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. RENJITH RAJU, S/O.RAJU,
AGED 23 YEARS, PUTHUVEETTIL THEKKATHIL,
GANAPATHY NAGAR NO.107, THAMARAKULAM WARD,
KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 001.
2. SREEJITH, S/O.GANESAN,
AGED 19 YEARS, PUTHUVEETTIL THEKKATHIL,
THAMARAKULAM WARD, GANAPATHY NAGAR NO.103,
KOLLAM EAST VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 001.
Crl.MC.No. 1911 of 2014
3. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P.
R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 16-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
Crl.MC.No. 1911 of 2014
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-
ANNEXURE-A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.1946/13 OF
KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-A2: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.1946/13 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION AS
C.C.324/13 PENDING BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KOLLAM.
ANNEXURE-A3: THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT (DEFACTO COMPLAINANT)
DATED 21.03.2014.
ANNEXURE-A4: THE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT (THE CO-INJURED) DATED 21.03.2014.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
rs.
K. Ramakrishnan, J.
==============================
Crl.M.C.No.1911 of 2014
==============================
Dated this, the 16th day of July, 2014.
O R D E R
This is an application filed by the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C.No.234/13 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. It is alleged in the petition that petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C.No.243/2013 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam which was originated on the basis of a crime registered as Crime No.1946/2013 on the basis of the statement given by the de facto complainant first respondent herein. Originally the offence alleged were under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326 and read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and more than 5 persons were shown in the First Information Report. After investigation, final report was filed confining to the petitioners alone and alleging offences under Sections 341, 324, 326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties. The de facto complainant Crl.M.C.No.1911 of 2014 : 2 : and his friend who are the injured in the case shown as respondents 1 & 2 do not want to prosecute the case. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction. Since some of the offences are non-compoundable in nature, they could not file the application before the court below.So, the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief:
"To quash all further proceedings in
C.C.No.234/2013, the final report as Annexure-A2
pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kollam arising out of Crime No.1946/2013 of Kollam East Police Station, Kollam to secure the ends of justice."
3. Respondents 1 & 2 appeared through Counsel and submitted that they have settled the issue between the parties due to the intervention of mediators and they have no grievance against the petitioners now and the incident happened due to some provocation caused in the Beer Parlour while they were taking beer from the Beer Parlour and they have filed an affidavit stating these facts.
4. The Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that it was not an intentional act, but, after finishing their cricket game, the petitioners went to the bar to take beer and at that Crl.M.C.No.1911 of 2014 : 3 : time, some incident happened and the respondents 1 & 2 sustained some injuries and due to the intervention of well wishers of both parties, the matter has been settled between the parties. So, he prayed for allowing the application.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, as directed by this court, submitted that there is no other case against the petitioners, but it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings as there is no relationship between the petitioners and they are total strangers.
6. It is an admitted fact that both the de facto complainant and his friend the other injured and the petitioners were there in the Beer Parlour and there was some incident happened and on account of that provocation, some incident occurred in which respondents 1 & 2 sustained some injuries. On the basis of the statement given by the first respondent, originally, Annexure AI First Information Report was registered as Crime No.1946/2013 of Kollam East Police Station against 4 named persons and 2 identifiable persons alleging offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 326 and read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and after investigation, it was revealed that only 4 persons namely the Crl.M.C.No.1911 of 2014 : 4 : present petitioners alone involved in the case and the final report was filed confining to the petitioners alone alleging offences under Sections 341, 324, 326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and now the case is pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam. The matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of well wishers. It is true that there is no close relationship as such between the parties and it is also seen from the allegations in the final report that, it was not an intentional act. But, it happened from the Beer Parlour when both were consuming Beer and due to some incident occurred that flared up and resulted in the incident mentioned in the First Information Report. However, now the parties have settled the dispute and the de facto complainant and the injured namely, respondents 1 & 2 filed a detailed affidavit produced as Annexure 3 & 4 stating these facts. No purpose will be served by proceeding with the case as well. It cannot be said to be incident of public interest as well. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction, and proceeding with the case will only amount to wastage of judicial time.
7. Further in the decision reported in Gian Singh V. Crl.M.C.No.1911 of 2014 : 5 : State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], it has been held that if a private dispute which resulted in registration of crime and if it is not an intentional or premeditated act and after the incident, if they realized the mistake and settled the issue between them due to the intervention of mediators and well wishers and their original relationship is restored, then court can honour such settlement and quash the proceedings though non compoundable offences were incorporated. The court has to consider the gravity of the offence, the manner in which it was committed and the reason behind the same etc.,. In this case, incident occurred from the Beer Parlour and it is a clear case of impact of alcoholism on youngsters. Further, now they have realized their mistake and they want to reform themselves and the pendency of this case should not be a hurdle for the same. It cannot be said that they are having criminal background and there is no possibility for them to reform as well. So, considering these aspects, this court feels that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction and proceeding with the case will only amount to wastage of judicial time and the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked to quash the Crl.M.C.No.1911 of 2014 : 6 : proceedings so as to give an opportunity for the petitioners who are youngsters involved in the crime without knowing the consequences while they were in a Beer Parlour and they want to reform themselves.
So, the petition is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.No.234/13 (Crime No.1946/2013 of Kollam East Police Station) pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kollam as against the petitioners is quashed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately.
Sd/-
K.Ramakrishnan, Judge.
Bb [True copy] P.A to Judge