Kerala High Court
Jiyas vs Joel Andrews on 30 January, 2013
Author: T.R.Ramachandran Nair
Bench: T.R.Ramachandran Nair
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/10TH MAGHA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 3963 of 2012 (A)
--------------------------------------
[C.C.NO.116/2011 OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ALUVA]
.....................
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
----------------------------------
1. JIYAS,
S/O FAROOK,AGED 23 YEARS,
KONATH HOUSE,KUTHIRAKULAM P.O,
VEMBAYAM KARA,NEDUMANGAD TALUK.
2. ANAND KRISHNA,
S/O MADHUSOODANAN NAIR,AGED 22 YEARS,
SREE ANAND,KPRA 75,
LMS JUNCTION,ATTINGAL KARA,CHIRAYINKEEZHU.
3. ANOOP, AGED 22 YEARS,
S/O SIVAN,KAVUMPURATH HOUSE,VETUKAD KARA,
PUTHOOR VILLAGE,THRISSUR.
4. THOMAS,
S/O THOMAS,AGED 22 YEARS,
KUZHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,MATHADI KARA,
THIRUVALLA,PATHANAMTHITTA.
5. ROSHITH, AGED 22 YEARS,
S/O RAMACHANDRAN,MANGATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
THENIDUKKU KARA,VADAKKANCHERRY.
6. SHINAS B. SALAM, AGED 22 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL SALAM,THEKKAKARA HOUSE,KUTTIPUZHA VILLAGE,
THIRUVALLA/
7. ANEES.U, AGED 22 YEARS,
S/O USUF KUNJU,NADEERA MANZIL,MANANAKKU,
CHIRAYINKEEZAHU.
BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN.
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/ STATE:
----------------------------------------------------------
1. JOEL ANDREWS,
S/O ANDREWS, CHOONDAT HOUSE,VALILLAPUZHA P.O,
KEEZHUPARAMBU VILLAGE,MALAPPURAM -673 639.
CRL.M.C. NO.3963/2012-A:
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION- 683 104.
3. STATE,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM- 682 031.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS,
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. T. RAMAPRASAD UNNI.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 30-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Prv.
CRL.M.C. NO.3963/2012-A:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE I: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT.
ANNEXURE II: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
TO THE PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGE.
ANNEXURE III: COPY OF THE ENQURIY REPORT.
ANNEXURE IV: COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT.
ANNEXURE V: COPY OF THE CHARGE.
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Prv.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
--------------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.No. 3963 Of 2012
--------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF JANUARY, 2013
ORDER
The petitioners are accused in C.C.No.116/2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva, wherein the offences alleged are under Sections 341, 342, 294(b) and 506(i) read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 4 of the Kerala Prohibition of Ragging Act, 1998.
2. The allegation raised against the petitioners as revealed from paragraph No.2 of the Crl.M.C. is that with the intention of committing ragging on the 1st respondent, who was a 2nd year student of the College, the petitioners have wrongfully restrained him in Room No.102 of the hostel by closing the room from outside and he was threatened by using abusive words and thereby annoyed him. Annexure II is the copy of the complaint given by the 1st respondent to the Principal and based on the complaint forwarded by the Principal, a criminal case has been registered. Annexure IV is the report of enquiry conducted by the College and the Committee was of the opinion that there is no concrete evidence of witnesses to support the complaint of the 1st respondent.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the Crl.M.C.No.3963/12 -2- learned counsel for the 1st respondent.
4. It is submitted that the disputes have been amicably settled between the parties and an affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent stating that he has freely and voluntarily settled the disputes with the petitioners for the peace and harmony of the institution in which he is studying. It is stated that he has no further complaint against the accused persons. All the accused and himself are continuing their studies in the same educational institution without any complaint, it is stated.
5. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.
6. In the light of the facts pointed out above, it is evident that the complaint was found against by the Committee of the college and as far as the remaining accused are concerned, the parties have amicably settled the disputes also. All the petitioners as well as the 1st respondent are continuing their studies in the educational institution and there is total harmony between them also.
7. In the light of the above and in the light of the fact that no further complaint is there against the petitioners, there will not be any useful purpose in proceeding with the prosecution and there will not be any successful prosecution also. In a matter like this, wherein the dispute is purely private in nature and the same has been settled between the parties, this Court will be justified in invoking the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. especially in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Gian Crl.M.C.No.3963/12 -3- Singh v. State of Punjab (2012(4) KLT 108). I am therefore of the view that there will not be any useful purpose in proceeding with the case. It is also pointed out that earlier the petitioners have filed Crl.M.C.No.3570/12 for quashing the complaint, wherein the petitioners were directed to seek appropriate defence before the learned Magistrate. Even though they approached the learned Magistrate, for discharge, charge has been framed as per Annexure V. Therefore, there will not be any bar in considering the matter by this Court.
The Crl.M.C.is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.116/11 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva is quashed.
Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR), JUDGE.
dsn