Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 14TH ASWINA, 1944 S.T. NO.28/2022 OF JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD, THRISSUR (PRINCIPAL MAGISTRATE, JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD, THRISSUR) CRIME NO.88/2011 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATON PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SUJITH AGED 28 YEARS S/O SURESH, MUTHERI HOUSE, PANDIPARAMBU DESAM, MADAKKATAHARA VILLAGE THRISSUR, PIN - 680651 BY ADV BINU PAUL RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031 2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE VIYYUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, , PIN - 680001 3 VINEETH AGED 30 YEARS, S/O VIJAYAN, NEENDUTHALAKKAL HOUSE, MUTTIKKAL, MADAKKATHARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680651 BY ADVS. ADV SHINE MATHEWS(VADAKKEKARA) ADV JEAN ALEX ADV C S HRITHWIK-SR PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.88/2011 of Viyyur Police Station. The aforesaid case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341,323, 324, 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and two other accused.
2. The prosecution case is that on 11.02.2011 at about
22.15 p.m., the accused persons, assaulted the 3 rd respondent and stabbed him with a knife. Annexure A1 is the First Information Report and Annexure A2 is the final report submitted by the Police. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure A2 final report.
3. As the petitioner was a juvenile, the case against him
has been split up and forwarded to Juvenile Justice Board, Thrissur where it was taken into file as S.T. No.28/2022. The remaining accused were tried before the IInd Additional Assistant Sessions Court, Thrissur as S.C. No.674/2011 and it culminated in Annexure A3 judgment.
4. Heard Sri.Binu Paul, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.C.S. Hrithwik, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Sri.Shine Mathews (Vadakkekara) learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.
5. The prayer for quashing the above proceedings is sought
for by the petitioner on the ground that, the dispute between the parties has been settled and to substantiate the same, the defacto complainant has sworn Annexure A4 affidavit. The aforesaid affidavit indicates that, the matter has been settled and the defacto complainant has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner herein. He also conveyed that he has no objection in quashing the proceedings against the petitioner herein. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent/defacto complainant also confirmed the same. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the veracity of the settlement was verified by the Station House officer concerned and before the SHO also, the defacto complainant has reiterated that, he does not have any objection in quashing the proceedings as he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner herein.
6. Going through the materials available on record, it is
discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioner herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak.
7. One of the offences is under Section 307 of Indian Penal
Code and therefore, the proceedings cannot be quashed normally, on the basis of a settlement. However, in this case it is pointed out that, the trial of the other accused conducted before the Additional Assistant Sessions Court, Thrissur, resulted in Annexure A3
judgment by which both of them were acquitted. I have perused the
nature of evidence that has been adduced by the prosecution in the said case and the appreciation made by the learned Sessions Judge. It is discernible therefrom that, the defacto complainant has been examined in the said trial as PW2. He clearly stated that, even though he sustained the stab injury he does not know the culprits. He also referred to the settlement arrived at between the parties as
well. PW1 was the other occurrence witness. He also turned hostile to the prosecution and stated that he had given the names of the accused in Ext.P1 on mere suspicion and he is not aware of the identity of the culprits. PW3 to PW5 who were examined to prove the incident as eye witnesses were also turned hostile to the prosecution. Thus, after going through the entire evidence, learned Sessions Judge arrived at a conclusion that, no evidence at all was adduced by the prosecution and therefore, accused Nos.1 and 3 were acquitted under Section 232 of Cr.P.C. On perusal of the observations made in Annexure 3, it can be safely concluded that, by virtue of the same, the substratum of the prosecution case itself is lost. Therefore, on account of the settlement arrived at between the parties and also due to the finding entered by the learned Sessions Judge in respect of co-accused in Annexure A3, I am of the view that, further proceedings in the matter would be a futile exercise. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and to quash the proceedings.
Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure A2 final report submitted in Crime No.88/2011 of Viyyur Police Station and all further proceedings against the petitioner in S.T. No.28/2022 pending before the Juvenile Justice Board, Thrissur (Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Thrissur ) are hereby quashed.
Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6393/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES AnnexureA1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R.NO.88 OF 2011 DATED 05.02.2011 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT/CHARGE SHEET DATED 10.01.2022 IN F.I.R.NO.88 OF 2011 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE II ADDITIONAL SUB JUDGE, THRISSUR IN SC NO. 674/2011 DATED 28.06.2013 Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 29.08.2022