Kerala High Court
Vishnu vs State Of Kerala on 3 February, 2014
Author: K. Ramakrishnan
Bench: K.Ramakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JULY 2014/11TH ASHADHA, 1936
Crl.MC.No. 2233 of 2014 ()
---------------------------
CRIME NO. 256/2014 OF CHERTHALA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
......
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 4:
-------------------------------------------------------
1. VISHNU, AGED 25 YEARS,
S/O. PONNAPPAN, VISHNU SADANAM, WARD NO. XII,
THANEERMUKKOM PANCHAYATH, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.
2. SUNIL, AGED 24 YEARS,
S/O. SURENDRAN, NARAYANAVELI, WARD NO. XII,
THANNEERMUKKOM PANCHAYATH, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.
3. PRAVEEN, AGED 19 YEARS,
S/O. PRAKASAN, AMBALAVELI VEETTIL, WARD NO. IX,
THANNEERMUKKOM PANCHAYATH, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.
4. KANNAN, AGED 24 YEARS,
S/O. SIVADASAN, DEVI VILASOM VEEDU, WARD NO. IX,
THANNEERMUKKOM PANCHAYATH, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA.
BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD.
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & INJURED:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. ASOK KUMAR, AGED 44 YEARS,
S/O. NARAYANAN, KOCHUVELI VEEDU,
VARANAM. P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688 524.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SHANES METHAR.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 02-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
Crl.MC.No. 2233 of 2014
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-
ANX.I. CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 256/2014 OF
CHERTHALA POLICE STATION.
ANX.II. CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.S IN CRIME NO. 256/2014 OF
CHERTHALA POLICE STATION.
ANX.III. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 03-02-2014 IN
CRIME NO. 256/2014 OF CHERTHALA POLICE STATION.
ANX.IV. AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
rs.
K. Ramakrishnan, J.
==============================
Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014
==============================
Dated this, the 02nd day of July, 2014.
O R D E R
This is an application filed by the petitioners who are accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.256/2014 of Cherthala Police Station 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 has been arrayed as accused in Crime No.256/2014 of Cherthala Police Station on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent alleging that they have committed the offence punishable under Sections 452, 323 & 308 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties. The second respondent now realised that under misconception and mistake, he had given the name of the petitioners. Now, he realised the mistake and wanted an early termination of the proceedings. So, no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case since it is in crime stage and non compoundable offences are incorporated, they cannot Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014 : 2 : get it compounded or dropped at this stage. So, the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief:
"To quash Annexure - I F.I.R and all proceedings based on the same."
3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that first accused in this case is a habitual offender and he is having other cases as well and all these accused were absconding.
4. The second respondent appeared through Counsel and submitted that since the matter has been settled, he does not want to prosecute the case against the petitioners.
5. The Counsel for the petitioners also submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction. So, he prays for allowing the application.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted a statement of the Sub Inspector of Police, Cherthala which reads as follows:
"It is respectfully submitted that, the above Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the FIR in Crime No.256/2014 of Cherthala Police Station.
It is submitted that, on 02.02.2014 at about 22.00 hrs, the petitioner and four others trespassed into the casualty block of Taluk Head Quarter Hospital, Cherthala with deadly Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014 : 3 : weapons like iron rod and brutally assaulted the respondent 2. Ashok Kumar, S/o:Narayanan, Kochuveli, Thanneermukkom P/w-11 due to previous enmity. The Second respondent sustained serious injuries on his head and all over his body. A case as cr.256/14 U/s: 452, 323, 308 and 34 IPC was registered on 03.02.14, 11.30 a.m. On the basis of the statement given by the Second respondent Ashok Kumar and the case is being investigating by me.
I questioned the witnesses, recorded their statements and prepared scene mahazer. The accused involved in this case are 1. Vishnu - 25, S/o:Kannan, Vishnu Sadanam, Kannankara P.O (petitioner), 2. Sunil - 24, S/o: Surendran, Narayanaveli, Kannankara P.O, 3. Praveen - 24, S/o:
Prakasan, Ambalaveli (H), Thanneermukkom and Unni@Kannan - 25, S/o: Sivadasan, Devivilasom (H), Thanneermukkom. All the above accused are absconding.
It is submitted that the petitioner Vishnu is a habitual offender and he has involved in two other criminal cases registered at Muhamma police station ie., 1. Cr.81/14 U/s: 458, 323, 341, 34 IPC in which the petitioner and one Sunil trespassed into the house of Ashok Kumar (2nd respondent) on 02.02.2014, 07.00 p.m and assaulted him due to previous enmity. He sustained injuries on his left ear and back. 2.
Cr.509/14 U/s:323, 294(b), 341, 427, 434 IPC in which the petitioner and his two associates assaulted a bus driver named Biju, Puthenveli,near Elanjaklulangara. On the basis of statement given by the above said Biaju on 26.05.2014 the case was registered at Muhamma PS as Cr.509/14 against the petitioner and others.
It is submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and thereby creates law and order situations in Muhamma and Cherthala locality. This will adversely affect the peaceful life of public. In this circumstances it is most humbly submits that Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014 : 4 : the petition of the petitioners may kindly be dismissed and the cases against the petitioners may kindly be permitted to complete the investigation and be charge sheeted, so that the peaceful life of the common public in that areas can be kept."
7. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent as de facto complainant, a case was registered as Crime No.256/2014 of Cherthala Police Station against the petitioners alleging ofeences under Sections 452, 323 & 308 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and it is in the investigation stage. Now, the de facto complainant came with a case that he had implicated the petitioners under misconception and now the matter has been settled between the parties. It is iseen from the report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that first accused in this case namely the first petitoner herein is a habitual offender and he is accused in Crime No.81/2014 under Sections 458, 323, 341 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Crime No.509/2014 under Sections 323, 294(b), 341, 427, 434 Indian Penal Code. So, it is clear from this that the first petitioner is not having any good background. He is having a tendency to commit crime and the other petitioners also now joined together and involving in criminal activities. Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014 : 5 :
8. It is true that in Gian Singh V. State of Punjab 2012(4) KLT 108 (SC), Supreme Court has held that if the matter is settled between the parties, the case can be quashed. But, in the same decision, certain guidelines have been given regarding the nature of cases in which the power under Section 482 can be invoked to quash proceedings in which non compoundable offences are involved. If it is having some impact on the society, the gravity of offence also will have to be taken into account. In the same decision, it has been observed that merely because the victims of the offence have settled the dispute in such cases is not a ground for the court to quash the proceedings on the ground of settlement if the court feels that it is a matter affecting the public at large. Further, in the above decision, the Honourable Supreme Court intended to exercise the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, in cases where family issues are involved, private or commercial transactions have been converted in to criminal matters, then, in order to bring harmony among the family members and the business community, this can be used if it is settled and not in all cases where habitual offenders are involved or grave crimes have been committed. If a liberal Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014 : 6 : view is taken and the High Court excercises power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, very liberally quashing the cases at the crime stage itself without allowing the investigating agency to go into the question and find out the truth, then, it will only give a wrong message to the society and the tendancy to commit crime will increase and they may be under the hope that crime can be committed, later it can be settled and if they approach the Honourable High Court, it will be quashed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure very liberally. Such a message should not be given to the society by allowing 482 to be misused in such a larger extent. So, considering the circumstances and also the nature of offence alleged, nature of weapon used and also there is nothing mentioned in the affidavit regarding the relationship between the parties, I don't think that it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has to be invoked merely on the ground that there was settlement arrived at between the parties to quash the proceedings and the petition is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the court Crl.M.C.No.2233 of 2014 : 7 : below at the earliest.
Sd/-
K.Ramakrishnan, Judge.
Bb [True copy] P.A to Judge