Kerala High Court
Linesh vs Muhammad on 3 July, 2015
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
FRIDAY,THE 3RD DAY OF JULY2015/12TH ASHADHA, 1937
Crl.MC.No. 3085 of 2014
---------------------------
SC 822/2013 OF ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (FAST TRACK ADHOC)-II,
KOZHIKODE.
.......
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
----------------------------------------------
1. LINESH, S/O. BALAN, AGED 27 YEARS,
KURUNGOTA KANDI THAZHA KUNI H.O,
THUNERI AMSOM DESOM, VATAKARA THALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
2. NIJESH, S/O.CHATHU, AGED 24 YEARS,
THUNDIYIL H.O, THUNDERI AMSOM DESOM,
VATAKARA THALUK.
3. NAJEESH, S/O.NANU, AGED 26 YEARS,
KIZHAKKEPARAMBATH H.O, THUNERI AMSOM DESOM,
VATAKARA THALUK
4. SARATH, S/O.RAMESAN, AGED 24 YEARS,
THUMBOLAKANDY H.O, THUNERI AMSOM DESOM,
VATAKARA THALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
----------------------------------------------
1. MUHAMMAD, S/O.ABDULLA, AGED 26 YEARS,
PALERI HOUSE, THUNERI AMSOM DESOM,
VATAKARA THALUK, KOZHIKODE DIST., PIN - 673 101.
2. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.
R1 BY ADV. SMT.P.A.ANEESHA
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SURESH.N
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
Crl.MC.No. 3085 of 2014
---------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
-------------------------------------------
ANNEXURE 1 : CERTIFIED COPY F.I.R 615/10 OF NADAPURAM POLICE.
ANNEXURE II : TRUE COPY OF SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF FIRST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
mbr/
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
==================
Crl.M.C.No.3085 of 2014
==================
Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2015
O R D E R
The prayer in this Criminal Miscellaneous Case instituted under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking the invocation of the inherent powers conferred on this Court as per the provision is to quash the impugned Annexure -I FIR in Crime No.615/2010 of Nadapuram Police Station and the final report/charge sheet filed therein and all further proceedings arising therefrom which has led to S.C 822/2013 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Adhoc-II) Kozhikode. The charges against the petitioners as revealed from the impugned FIR is that on 25/10/2010 at about 11.00 p.m.(night) the accused persons trespassed in to the house of the de facto complainant (R1 herein Sri.Muhammad ) and had thrown bomb towards his house with intention to cause injuries to the complainant and damage to his property and thereby cause damage to his house and car of the complainant to the tune of Rs.3000/- due to previous enmity etc. The main plank projected in this case made of the prayer for quashment of the impugned Crl.M.C.No.3085 of 2014 2 criminal proceedings is that the disputes between the petitioners (accused) and the R1 (de facto complainant) have been settled as borne out by Annexure II affidavit sworn to by the 1st respondent wherein he has stated that he has no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings.
2. Heard Sri. Zubair Pulikool learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. P.A.Aneesha learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/de facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2nd respondent State of Kerala.
3. As directed by this Court, the Investigating Officer in this crime has filed a statement along with the Government Pleader's memo dated 10/11/2014 in this case. Therein it is stated that there was many other criminal cases in which the present accused have been involved and though they have been acquitted from some matters, some matters are pending in respect of some accused like A3, A4 etc. wherein serious offences like one under Sections 308, 307 of the IPC etc. are still pending for trial. Details of such statement has given on pages 3 and 4 thereof are as follows:
"Other Cases in which accused involved and its present position are given below:
1) Accused Lineesh
1. Cr No.606/10 u/s 143, 147, 341, 323 r/w 149 IPC Crl.M.C.No.3085 of 2014 3 Acquitted,
2. Cr No.169/11 u/s 107 CrPC Bond Over,
3. Cr No.548/12 u/s 118(a) of KP Act Convicted
2)Accused Nijesh
1. Cr No.606/10 u/s 143, 147, 341, 323 r/w 149 IPC -
Acquitted,
2. Cr No.164/11 u/s 107 CrPC-Bond over
3)Accused Najeesh
1. Cr No.348/05 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 308, 427 r/w 149 IPC- Acquitted
2. Cr No.383/08 u/s 341, 323, 324, 308 r/w 34 IPC- Acquitted
3. Cr No.606/10 u/s 143, 147, 341, 323 r/w 149 IPC- Acquitted,
4. Cr No.729/10 u/s 143, 147, 341, 323, r/w 149 IPC- Pending Trial,
5. Cr.No.164/11 u/s 107 CrPC Bond over,
6. Cr No.120/12 u/s 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 152, 283, 332, 307 r/w 149 IPC and 3(2) of PDPP Act- Pending Trial
7. Cr No.132/14 u/s 341, 323, 324, 308 r/w 34 IPC- Pending Trial
8. Cr.No.84/11 u/s 143, 147, 452, 341, 323, 506(II), r/w 149 IPC,- Acquitted
9. Cr No.188/11 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 506 (II) 324, 308 r/w 149 IPC- Pending Trial
4)Accused Sarath
1. Cr No.383/08 u/s 341, 323, 324, 308 r/w 34 IPC-
Acquitted,
2. Cr No.109/10 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 r/w 149 IPC- Acquitted,
3. Cr No.729/10 u/s 143, 147, 341, 323 r/w 149 IPC-
Pending Trial,
4. Cr No.84/11 u/s 143, 147, 452, 341, 323, 506 (II) r/w 149 IPC-Acquitted,
5. Cr No.164/11 u/s 107 CrPC Bond over,
6. Cr No.188/11 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 506(II), 324, 308 r/w 149 IPC- Pending Trial
7. Cr No.120/12 u/s 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 152, 283, 332, 307 r/w 149 IPC and 3(2) of PDPP Act Pending Trial
8. Cr No.202/11 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 427, 153 (A), r/w 149 IPC- Pending Trial"
4. The Apex Court and various courts including this Crl.M.C.No.3085 of 2014 4 Court has consistently held that the court invested the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C considering the prayers for quashment on the ground of settlement and other grounds should exercise discretion with lot of care and circumspection. Having regard to the conduct of the petitioners in the impugned crime as well as taking due note of the antecedents of these accused persons wherein it is revealed that serious offences under Sections 307, 308 of the IPC etc. are pending trial against some of the accused in other criminal cases. This Court is of the considered opinion that the discretionary benevolence of the consideration of the prayer of quashment merely on the ground of settlement need not be exercised in the facts and circumstances of this case. Accordingly this Court is not inclined to grant prayer of quashment on the ground of settlement between the parties in the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to work out their other appropriate remedies in accordance with law.
5. The observations and findings in this judgment shall not be construed in any manner as even as a remote expression on the merits of the prosecution case or the defence case in the trial Crl.M.C.No.3085 of 2014 5 in the instant case as well as in the other cases referred to above shall not in any way remotely or indirectly trammel or influence by the observations of this Court in this order.
Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE MJL Crl.M.C.No.3085 of 2014 6