Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 1667 OF 2024 CRIME NO.1218/2014 OF CHIRAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.1276 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,ATTINGAL PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 ROBIN AGED 37 YEARS S/O. RAJAN JOHNI, HAPPY HOME, CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM, SARKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 2 ROSHAN AGED 35 YEARS S/O. RAJAN JOHNI, HAPPY HOME, CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM, SARKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 3 SHIBIN AGED 32 YEARS S/O. YESUDHAS, ST. MARYS HOME, THEKKE AYARURUTHI, CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM, SARKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 4 ANASU AGED 32 YEARS S/O. SHERLI, THEKKE AYARURUTHI PUTHUVAL HOUSE, SARKARA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 BY ADV SHAJIN S.HAMEED
RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031 2 JIJO AGED 33 YEARS S/O. SUNILKUMAR, PUTHUKARI MUPPAKUDI HOUSE, SARKARA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM, -:2:- THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 3 SINDHU AGED 52 YEARS W/O. SUNILKUMAR, PUTHUKARI MUPPAKUDI HOUSE, SARKARA VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU DESOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695304 R2 BY SRI. SONAY JOHN SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. NEEMA T.V. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -:3:- Dated this the 20th day of March, 2024
ORDER
The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, to quash Annexure-A Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. No.1276/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -I, Attingal.
2. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 4 in
Crime No. 1218/2014 of the Chirayinkeezhu Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered against them at the instance of the second respondent, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 427 and 354 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The crux of the prosecution allegation is that: -:4:-
on 17.10.2014, at around 21 hours, while CW1 was in front of his house, the first accused caught hold of his shirt and the second accused fisted on his left ear and the accused 3 and 4 kicked and fisted him. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
4. Heard; Sri.Shajin S. Hameed, the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and Sri. Sonay John, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners
submitted that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioners and the respondents 2 and 3 has been amicably settled and the respondents 2 and 3 have voluntarily executed Annexures- B and C affidavits, stating that they have no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners and have no -:5:- objection in all further proceedings in the above crime being quashed. Hence, the petition may be allowed.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,
submitted that the Investigating Officer has ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the petitioners and the respondents 2 and 3 has been amicably settled and the respondents 2 and 3 have voluntarily executed Annexures B and C affidavits.
7. The learned counsel for the respondents 2
and 3 have also submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the respondents 2 and 3 have no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners. The said submission is recorded.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab [2012 (10) SCC 303] and Prabatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and -:6:-
others vs. State of Gujarat and another [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that in the facts and circumstances of the case and to secure the ends of justice, where the High Court is satisfied that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and the offence is not serious in nature involving mental depravity, criminal proceedings may be quashed.
9. On a consideration of the facts, the rival
submissions made across the Bar, and the materials on record, especially after going through Annexures B and C affidavits sworn in by the respondents 2 and 3, which has been found to be genuine and bona fide by the Investigating Officer, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court, particularly since the alleged offences are not serious in nature, no public interest is involved, the chances of conviction is remote, the continuation of -:7:- the proceeding would only be wastage of judicial time and the settlement would augur harmony in society. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition.
In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Annexure-A Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C. No.1276/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -I, Attingal, as against the petitioners. The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly. SD/- C.S.DIAS,JUDGE rmm/20/3/2024 -:8:- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1667/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1218/2014 OF CHIRAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION. Annexure-B AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/CW1. Annexure-C AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/CW2.