Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943 CRL.MC NO. 6145 OF 2015 CC 3397/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR CRIME 469/2015 OF KATTOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: KIRAN AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.DEVADAS, MANAKKAD HOUSE, ARIPALAM P.O.,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL SMT.R.RAJITHA SMT.VINAYA V.NAIR RESPONDENT/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682 031. 2 REGHU S/O.VELAYUDHAN, THEKKEDATH HOUSE, POOMANGALAM VILLAGE,ARIPALAM DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 688. BY ADVS. SRI.MILESH.V.PAVIYALA SRI.K.B.PRADEEP OTHER PRESENT: SR.PP - SRI. HRITHWIK C.S. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.6145/15 2
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused in CC 3397/2015 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda, which arose from the final report in crime No.469/2015 of Kattoor police station that was registered on the basis of a complaint preferred by the 2nd respondent before Court. On conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has been laid before the court and the final report is now sought to be quashed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent and also the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had filed a
suit, on the right of a pathway, against the 2nd respondent and that was the reason for intimidating and misbehaving with him. According to him, even though the incident had happened on 19.03.2015, the crime was registered only on 01.06.2015 and the final report was filed on 04.06.2015, within three days, which shows the undue influence of the 2 nd respondent on the police in proceeding against the petitioner. So he complains that no investigation worth the name was conducted. He also points out that there is no independent
Crl.M.C.6145/15 3 witness cited by the prosecution; all the so called independent witnesses are relatives of the 2nd respondent and therefore, he has pressed for quashing the entire proceedings.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the 2 nd respondent has
submitted that he had filed a suit as OS 2776/2014 before the Munsiff's Court, Irinjalakuda against the petitioner and an interim order was obtained and the reason for delay etc. are matters to be considered on evidence.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that immediately
after the incident even though the 2nd respondent had approached the police, no action was followed and that precisely was the reason for approaching the Court with a private complaint. It was further pointed out by him that there are two suits pending between the parties as OS 2776/2014 instituted by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner and the other suit as OS 1841/2015 instituted by the petitioner against the 2nd respondent.
6. That means, there are long-standing civil disputes between the
parties on a pathway and they are not on good terms for long time. But the counsel on both sides could not apprise the Court with regard to the updates of the civil disputes. Whatever it may be, the delay highlighted, the contention that there are only partisan witnesses cited in the charge sheet, investigation Crl.M.C.6145/15 4
was conducted posthaste etc. cannot be taken as grounds for quashing a proceeding under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. It is trite that the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked only sparingly, to undo injustice done to a party. Here, I do not find any valid reason to interfere and to quash the proceedings. The genuineness or reliability of the witnesses has to be considered by the Court after taking evidence and examining the witnesses. The civil disputes also cannot be highlighted to quash the proceedings. Valid reasons are not made out to quash the proceedings and therefore the Crl.M.C. is liable to be dismissed. Dismissed. Sd/- K.HARIPAL JUDGE okb/1.10. //True copy// P.S. to Judge
Crl.M.C.6145/15 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6145/2015 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE-A: CERTIFIED COPY OF F.I.R IN CRIME ANNEXURE-B: CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME 469/15 OF KATTOOR POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-C: TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN OS 2776/14 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, IRINJALAKUDA. ANNEXURE-D: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS IRINJALAKUDA.