Kerala High Court
Shabeer.M vs The State Of Kerala on 24 May, 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
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/9TH ASHADHA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 3620 of 2016 ()
---------------------------
CC.NO. 3494/2014 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I, HOSDURG
CRIME NO. 988/2014 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION , KASARGOD DISTRICT
---------------------
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
------------------------------------------------
1. SHABEER.M.,
S/O.ABDUL KHADER M.T.P., AGED 23 YEARS,
RESIDING AT M.K. HOUSE, EDACHAKKAI,
UDINOOR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
2. SADAM HUSSAIN P.,
S/O.ANEEFA, AGED 25 YEARS,
RESIDING AT PARAMBATH HOUSE,
EDACHAKKAI, UDINOOR VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
3. NOUSHAD T.K.,
AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM,
RESIDING AT ALEEMA MANZIL,
EDACHAKKAI, UDINOOR VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
4. MANSOOR M.T.P.,
AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED KUNHI K.L.,
RESIDING AT MANSOOR MAHAL,
EDACHAKKAI, UDINOOR VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
---------------------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2/-
-2-
CRL.MC.NO.3620/2016
2. VIPIN P.V.,
S/O.BHASKARAN N., AGED 29 YEARS,
RESIDING AT PADINHARE VETTIL,
PADANE KADAPURAM, VALIYA PARAMBA VILLAGE,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 124.
3. BABISH P.V.,
S/O.KANNAN, AGED 22 YEARS,
RESIDING AT PAVOOR VEEDU,
PADANEKADAPURAM, VALIYAPARAMBA VILLAGE,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 124.
4. RATHEESH P.V.,
S/O.CHANDRAN, AGED 22 YEARS,
RESIDING AT ARAKKAL VEEDU,
PADANEKADAPURAM, VALIYA PARAMBA VILLAGE,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 124.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE
R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SMT.G.SANGEETHA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
Crl.MC.No. 3620 of 2016 ()
---------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
-------------------------------------------
ANNEX A1 : THE TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.988/2014 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXA2 : THE TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.988/2014 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXA3 : THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 24-5-2016 SWORN IN BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
ANNEX A4 : THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 24-5-2016 SWORN IN BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEX A5 : THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 24-5-2016 SWORN IN BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEX A6 : THE TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE MEMO OF EVIDENCE IN
CRIME NO.988/2014 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL
-------------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J.
===================
Crl. M.C. No.3620 of 2016
=======================
Dated this the 30th day of June, 2016
ORDER
1.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C.No.3494 of 2011 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class- I, Hosdurg. Respondent No.1 is the defacto complainant and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are victims.
2.They have preferred this petition 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 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 Crl. M.C. No.3620 of 2016 2 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.Referring to the facts, it is borne out from the records that crime No.988 of 2014 of Chandera Police Station was registered at the instance of the 1st respondent herein alleging offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 294(b), 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the IPC. The prosecution allegation is that on 10.11.2014 at 6.30 pm, the petitioners had assaulted the defacto complainant and causing injuries.
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, the 2nd respondent has also filed an affidavit wherein he states in unequivocal terms that he has pardoned the Crl. M.C. No.3620 of 2016 3 petitioners and reiterates that he has no objection in terminating the proceedings.
5.The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that the petitioners are not persons 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 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.
Crl. M.C. No.3620 of 2016 4
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 petitioners in C.C.No.3494 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class- I, Hosdurg shall stand quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V. JUDGE SKV