Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE14H DAY OF FEBRUARY201425TH MAGHA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 1112 of 2014 () --------------------------- L.P.NO.120/2012 (C.C. NO.295/2008) OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOTTARAKKARA. CRIME NO.63/2008 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION. ...... PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ UPAS, S/O.SARASAN, AGED29YEARS, CHARUVILA VEEDU, KEEZHANNOOR, PEZHUMMOODU, PIRAVOOR MURI, CHITHARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU, SMT.BINDU GEORGE. RESPONDENTS/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN-682 031.
2. BIJU, S/O.KESAVANKUTTY, AGED33YEARS, RESIDING AT CHATHUPPIL VEEDU, DARPA PANA, PEZHUMMOODU, PIRAVOOR MURI, CHITHARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 306. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S. HYMA. R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1402-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. Crl.MC.No. 1112 of 2014 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE1COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.63/2008 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE2COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAL IN CRIME NO.63/2008 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE3COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE2D RESPONDENT REGARDING COMPROMISE DATED1101/2014. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. K. Ramakrishnan, J.
============================== Crl.M.C.No.1112 of 2014 ============================== Dated this, the 14th day of February, 2014. ORDER
This is an application filed by the first accused in L.P.No.120/12 (C.C.No.295/08 in Crime No.63/08 of Kadakkal Police Station) on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court No-II, Kottarakkara to quash the proceedings against the petitioner on the basis of the settlement arrived between the petitioner and the de facto complainant under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. It is alleged in the petition that on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent, a case was registered as Crime No.63/08 of Kadakkal police station alleging offences under Sections. 341, 324 and 34 of Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner and another accused. The case against the second accused was tried and disposed of by the court as settled between the parties. Since the petitioner was employed in Military Service, he could not participate in the trial at that time and the learned magistrate had split up his case and transferred to register of long pending cases and now it is pending as L.P.120/12. The dispute Crl.M.C.No.1112 of 2014 :
2. : between the parties has been now settled amicably due to the intervention of well wishers and mediators. There is no possibility of conviction as the case against the second accused has already been terminated as settled and now the present case is also settled between the parties. Since, some of the offences are non- bailable in nature, the compounding cannot be recorded in the trial court. So, the petitioner has no other option except to approach this court for quashing the proceedings as against him invoking the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence this petition.
3. The second respondent appeared though counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and they are neighbours and they are now living in cordial terms. The Counsel also submitted that the de facto complainant has filed an affidavit to that effect as well. On the basis of the directions given by this court, learned Public Prosecutor enquired about the antecedents of the petitioner and submitted that except this case, there is no other case pending against the petitioner and he has no other criminal background as well and the case against the second accused was ended in acquittal on the basis of the settlement between Crl.M.C.No.1112 of 2014 :
3. : the parties.
4. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent, a case was registered as Annexure-1 First Information Report was registered as Crime No.63/08 of Kadakkal police station alleging offences under Section 341, 324 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner and another and after investigation, Annexure A2 final report was filed against both the petitioners and the case was originally taken on file as C.C.No.295/08 by the learned magistrate.
5. It is alleged in the petition and admitted by Counsel for the de facto complainant that the case against the second accused was tried and disposed of on the basis of the settlement arrived between the parties. Now, the dispute between the petitioner also settled and de facto complainant has no intention to proceed with the case. He had also filed an affidavit admitting the settlement and also expressing his willingness to quash the proceedings on the basis of the settlement. In the decision reported Gian Singh V. State of Punjab 2012(4) KLT108(SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in family disputes and if it is a dispute of Crl.M.C.No.1112 of 2014 :
4. : personal nature and no public interest is involved, if the parties have settled their issues due to the intervention of well wishers and family members and does not want to proceed with the criminal prosecution initiated, then that must be honoured and the prosecution has to be quashed invoking the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
6. It is seen from the records that the petitioner and the de facto complainant were neighbours and it is submitted by the Counsel for the petitioner and the second respondent- de facto complainant that they are living in harmony now. So, in view of the dictum laid down in the decision in Gian Singh's case (supra) and also considering the fact that harmony has been resolved between the petitioner and the second respondent on account of settlement and no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case as de facto complainant is not going to support the prosecution, I feel that it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has to be invoked to quash the proceedings especially considering the fact that the dispute is a private one and not having any public interest and also the matter is settled between the parties. Crl.M.C.No.1112 of 2014 :
5. : So, the application is allowed and further proceedings against the petitioner in L.P.120/12 (C.C.No.295/08 in Crime No.63/08 Kadakkal police station) pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, No.II, Kottarakkara is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court for further action. Sd/- K.Ramakrishnan, Judge. Bb [True copy] P.A to Judge