Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2013 8TH SRAVANA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 3186 of 2013 --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.238/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II,PATHANAMTHITTA ....... CRIME NO. 552/2007 OF KONNI POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTITTA ....... PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SAJI KUMAR P.P.,AGED 4 YEARS, S/O.P.K.PADMANABHAN, PUTHENVEETIL, KONNI THAZHAM MURI AND VILLAGE, KOZENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT/STATE.: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ALICE MATHAI,AGED 6 YEARS, D/O.MATHAI, ALAPPATTU VEETIL, KONNI THAZHAM MURI AND VILLAGE, KOZENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 691. (CW 1 - DE -FACTO COMPLAINANT).
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR, KONNI POLICE STATION, PIN-689 691.
3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.JUSTUS R2 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss CRMC.NO.3186/2013 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX.1: COPY OF THE ACCUSED COPY IN CRIME NO.552/2007 OF KONNI POLICE STATION. ANNEX.2: COPY OF THE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss V.K.MOHANAN, J.
------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.3186 of 2013 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of July, 2013 ORDER The above petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'Cr.P.C.') at the instance of the petitioner, who is the accused in C.C.No.238 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta which is a case instituted upon the police report in Crime No.552 of 2007 of Konni Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 463, 467 and 474 of I.P.C. with a prayer to quash all proceedings in Annexure-1 in Crime No.552 of 2007 of Konni Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.238 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta as the matter is settled out of court.
2. The allegation against the petitioner/accused, who was the rubber tapper in the property of the de facto complainant is that he had created a document styled as an agreement showing the receipt of `20,000/- in consideration of the tapping of the rubber trees of the de facto complainant and Crl.M.C.No.3186 of 2013 :-2-: thereby the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 463, 467 & 474 of IPC.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that, connected with the transaction with respect to the tapping of rubber trees, a suit was filed by the very same de facto complainant. Now, according to the petitioners, both the criminal as well as the civil cases are settled out of court. The first respondent herein is the de facto complainant and she had sworn into Annexure-A2 affidavit.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the 1st respondent. I have also heard the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, during the pendency of the above case, the dispute is settled amicably between the parties which is the subject matter of the above case. Therefore, the continuation of the proceedings in the above case is abuse of process of law and proceedings.
6. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent who on the basis of specific instruction received from the respondent Crl.M.C.No.3186 of 2013 :-3-: submitted that the above respondent, who is the de facto complainant does not intend to proceed any further against the petitioner and she has no grievance against him.
7. I have carefully considered the above submissions of the respective counsel. I have verified the documents and materials produced along with the above petition including Annexure-2 affidavit. In the given facts and circumstances of the case and especially in the light of the settlement arrived between the parties to the dispute, the learned Public Prosecutor has also no objection in allowing the above petition.
8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, it can be seen that the offences involved in the above case are only under Sections 463, 467 & 474 of IPC which are more or less personal in nature and no public interest is involved. It is pertinent to note that though such offences are involved, the real parties to the dispute approached this Court after having amicably settled the matter. From the submission made by the counsel for the 1st respondent, it appears to me that the de facto complainant has Crl.M.C.No.3186 of 2013 :-4-: no further grievance against the petitioner/accused in the light of the settlement arrived by them. In this juncture, it is relevant to note the decision of the Honourable Apex Court reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012(4) KLT 10.(SC)] in which the Supreme Court has held as follows:- "57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under S.320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R. may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed.. It is further held as follows:- "......... But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial,mercandile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the Crl.M.C.No.3186 of 2013 :-5-: family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim........" According to me, in the light of the facts and circumstances involved in the present case and particularly in view of the settlement arrived in the present case, the dictum laid in the above decision is applicable in the present case. According to me, as the parties to the dispute settled the issues amicably, it is the duty of this Court to promote and encourage such settlement, instead of compelling the parties to go on with the dispute. It is pertinent to note that since the matter is settled out of court, in the event of proceeding with the trial, there would not have any fruitful prosecution resulting the conviction of the accused, rather the net result would be sheer waste of judicial time and abuse of process of Crl.M.C.No.3186 of 2013 :-6-: the court and proceedings. Thus, according to me, following the decisions cited supra, this Criminal M.C. can be allowed granting the relief as sought for. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, quashing all proceedings in Annexure-1 in Crime No.552 of 2007 of Konni Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.238 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE skj True copy P.A. to Judge