Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 7354 OF 2023 CRIME NO.500/2017 OF Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam CC 1066/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOCHI PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: LENIN AGED 46 YEARS, S/O BABU, CHAMBAKKAL HOUSE, SREENARAYANA ROAD, PERUMPADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682000 BY ADVS. M.H.HANIS P.M.JINIMOL T.N.LEKSHMI SHANKAR RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE: 1 RAJEEV S/O SUBRAMANIYAN, APPANKERI HOUSE, SREENARAYANA ROAD, PERUMPADAPPU, KOCHI-, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682006 2 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,, PIN - 682031 BY ADVS. T.H.ARUN KUMAR SHERRY J. THOMAS(K/815/2002) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.8469/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY,THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023/10TH KARTHIKA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 8469 OF 2023 CRIME NO.0479/2017 OF Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam CC 1061/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOCHI PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3: 1 RAJEEVAN AGED 46 YEARS APPANKARY HOUSE, SN ROAD, PERUMPADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682006 2 ANWAR AGED 46 YEARS S/O. K.P.MUHAMMED, THUNDATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682006 3 KANNAN @ NITHIN AGED 46 YEARS S/O. PRADEEP, THEKKEKALATHIL HOUSE, KONAM, PERUMPADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682006 BY ADVS. T.H.ARUN KUMAR SHERRY J. THOMAS RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 LENIN AGED 46 YEARS S/O. BABU, CHAMBAKKAL HOUSE, S.N.ROAD. PERUMPADAPPU, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682006 OTHER PRESENT: SMT SREEJA V, PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2023, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.7354/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------- Crl.M.C. Nos.7354 & 8469 of 2023 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 01st day of November, 2023
ORDER
This two Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are connected and therefore, I am disposing these two cases by a common
order.
2. Crl.M.C.No.8469/2023 is filed to quash the
proceedings in C.C.No.1061/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, arising from Crime No.479/2017 of Palluruthy Police Station. Crl.M.C. No.7354/2023 is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1066/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, arising from Crime No.500/2017 of Palluruthy Police Station. It is submitted that these are case and counter case. It is also submitted that both sides settled the matter.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the prosecution proceedings.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,
submitted that the petitioner in Crl.M.C. No.7354/2023 is involved in other cases also. But it is conceded that the offence alleged in this particular case against that petitioner is only under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Moreover, the above case alleged is under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, which is a non-cognizable offence and there is no case to the prosecution that any permission under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. is obtained.
6. This Court has considered the submission of the petitioners, victims and the Public Prosecutor.
7. In State of Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan
and Others (2019 (5) SCC 688), three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The Apex Court in Laxmi Narayan's case (supra) also relied on the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (2012
(10) SCC 303) and Narinder Singh and others v. State of
Punjab and another (2014 (6) SCC 466). The Apex Court in paragraph 13 of the Laxmi Narayan's case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted hereunder:
“13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein above, it is observed and held as under: i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non - compoundable offences under S.320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves; ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society; iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;
iv) offences under S.307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of S.307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of S.307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under S.307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital / delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case
of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above; v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement / compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.”
8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the
Apex Court, this Court perused the facts in this case and also perused the documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that, the dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be accepted. Therefore, these Criminal Miscellaneous Cases are allowed in the following manner:
1. In Crl.M.C. No.8469/2023, all further
proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.1061/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, arising from Crime No.479/2017 of Palluruthy Police Station, are quashed.
2. In Crl.M.C. No.7354/2023, all further
proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.1066/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kochi, arising from Crime No.500/2017 of Palluruthy Police Station, are quashed. sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JV JUDGE APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7354/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO. 500/2017 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, Annexure B THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
IN CC NO.1066/2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOCHI ARISING FROM CRIME NO. 500/2017 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8469/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF F.I.R IN CRIMENO.0479 DATED 25-02-2017 OF PALLURUTHY KASABA POLICE STATION. Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT NO.668 DATED 28-0202017 IN CRIME NO.0479/2017SUBMITTED BY THE PALLURUTHY KASABA POLICE BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- II KOCHI. Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 15/12/2021, ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATH, KOCHI CORPORATION. Annexure -4 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 07-10- 2023 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT SHOWING THE SETTLEMENT