Full Judgment
Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 2ND POUSHA, 1944 CRL.MC NO. 8579 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCC 580/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,PALAKKAD PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 VIPIN KUMAR, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.APPUKUTTAN, PANTHAL THODI HOUSE, MALAMPALLAM, MANNUR WEST.P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 842. 2 SANTHOSH, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O MANI, MALAMPALLAM HOUSE, MANNOOR WEST.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 842. 3 KRISHNANDAS, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.SWAMINATHAN, PULAYKKAL HOUSE, MANNOOR WEST.P.O PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 842. BY ADVS. DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN VINOD S. PILLAI NAYANA VARGHESE AHAMMAD SACHIN K.
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 2 REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. 2 K.MUJEEB RAHMAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.KAJAHUSSAIN, CHOLAKKAL HOUSE, 21/211, AKG NAGAR, VENNAKKARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 004. BY ADV AHAMMAD SACHIN K. SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 3
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.196 of 2019 of Mankara Police Station, which is now pending as C.C.No.580 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Palakkad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 341, 323, 326, 427, read with Section 149 IPC.
2. Annexure-A1 is the FIR, and Annexure-A2 is the final
report submitted by the Police. The 2 nd respondent is the de facto complainant. This Crl.M.C. is filed for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2.
3. Heard Sri.Dinesh Mathew J. Murikkan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Vipin Narayanan, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and Ahammad Sachin K., learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
4. Prayer for quashing the proceedings is sought mainly on the ground that the dispute between the parties has been
settled. Annexure-A3 affidavit sworn by the 2 nd respondent/de facto complainant is filed along with this Crl.M.C. to substantiate the settlement. In the said affidavit, the 2 nd respondent/de facto Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 4
complainant had explicitly acknowledged the aforesaid settlement and also conveyed the no-objection to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant also confirms the same. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submitted that the Station House Officer concerned has verified the veracity of the same and found it to be genuine.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor, upon instruction
submitted that the 3rd petitioner is involved in two other cases in which offence under Section 307 IPC as well as offences under the Arms Act are also incorporated. It is pointed out that the case in which the offence under Section 307 IPC is incorporated is of the year 2022. Therefore, considering the criminal antecedents of the 3rd petitioner, the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C need not be invoked, contends the leanred Public
Prosecutor. It is further pointed out that, as far as the other petitioners are concerned, they are not involved in any other cases.
6. After considering all the relevant aspects, I find some
force in the contention put forward by the learned Public Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 5 Prosecutor. It is seen that the offences in which the 3 rd petitioner is involved are serious in nature. When a person is repeatedly
getting involved in serious cases, exercising this Court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C and granting the benefit of quashing the proceedings against such a person based on settlement is improper. Such powers are to be exercised only in cases where dispute is private, and no public interest is involved. However, quashing the prosecution against a person with serious criminal antecedents, on the basis of settlement, would be against the public interest. It can sometimes provide confidence to such persons, to commit crimes and get away with the same, by arriving at a settlement with the affected parties.
7. In such circumstances, I am not inclined to invoke the
powers of this Court in respect of the prosecution against the 3 rd petitioner herein. However, as it is pointed out that the 1 st and 2nd petitioners are not involved in any other criminal cases, I deem it appropriate to quash the proceedings against them.
In such circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure- A2 final report submitted in Crime No.196 of 2019 of Mankara Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant to the same as Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 6 against the petitioners 1 and 2 who are accused Nos.1 and 2, including the proceedings in C.C.No.580 of 2019 as against them
are hereby quashed. Prosecution against the 3 rd petitioner/3rd accused can be continued. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE DG/23.12.22 Crl.M.C.No.8579/22 7 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8579/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO.196/2019 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION DATED 20.06.2019 Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO:196/2019 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT NOW PENDING AS C.C.NO: 580 OF 2019 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II PALAKKAD. DATED 12.07.2019 Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 04.11.2022