Kerala High Court
Anish Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 20 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1944
CRL.MC NO. 2704 OF 2022
CC 199/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PATHANAMTHITTA
Crime No.843/2013 of Koipuram Police Station,
Pathanamthitta
PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.6:
ANISH KUMAR,
AGED 22 YEARS,
S/O.SADASIVAN PILLAI,
CHATANPARA, THEKKETHIL HOUSE,
PULLADU.P.O., THIRUVALLA KOIPURAM,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689548.
BY ADV T.K.BIJU (MANJINIKARA)
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,[CRIME NO.843/2013],
KOIPURAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA REP. BY
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 ARYA KRISHNAN,
AGED 31 YEARS,
W/O.AJITH,
PLAMKOOTTATHIL VEEDU, NELLIKAL MURI,
POOVATHOOR KUNNAM KOIPURAM VILLAGE
VARAYANNOR P O. PULLADU
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689548
3 AJITH
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O SASIDHARAN,
PLANKOOTTATHIL,
POOVATHUR P.O, KUNNAM, KOIPURAM VILLAGE,
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 695561
Crl.M.C.No.2704 of 2022
..2..
4 ANISH @ ANISHKUMAR.P.V
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O VIJAYAN
PLAMKOTTATHIL THEKKECHARUVIL NELLIKAL MURI,
KOIPURAM VILLAGE,
THIRUVALLA,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689531.
5 DIVAKARAN
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O THEVAN THAINILKUNNATHIL VADAKKETHIL
VEEDU,NELLIKAL MURI,
POOVATHOOR KUNNAM KOIPURAM VILLAGE,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689531.
R1 BY SRI M P PRASANTH- Public Prosecutor
R2 TO R5 BY ADVS.SHAHIM BIN AZIZ
SMT.ANNIE M.ABRAHAM
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.2704 of 2022
..3..
ORDER
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure-A2
Final Report in C.C.No.199/2019 on the file of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta on the ground of
settlement between the parties.
2. The petitioner is the accused No.6. All the remaining
accused were acquitted. The 2nd respondent is the de facto
complainant. The respondent Nos.3 to 5 are the injured.
3. The offences alleged against the petitioner are
punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323 and 324 read
with Section 149 of the IPC.
4. The respondent Nos.2 to 5 entered appearance
through counsel. Affidavits sworn in by them are also
produced.
5. I have heard Sri.T.K.Biju, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri.Shahim Bin Aziz, the learned counsel for the
respondent Nos.2 to 5 and Sri.M.P.Prasanth, the learned Public
Prosecutor for the respondent No.1.
6. The averments in the petition as well as the
affidavits sworn in by the respondent Nos.2 to 5 would show
Crl.M.C.No.2704 of 2022
..4..
that the entire dispute between the parties has been amicably
settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to
proceed with the criminal proceedings further. The learned
Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was
enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement
of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she
reported that the matter was amicably settled.
7. The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab
[2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], Narinder Singh and Others v.
State of Punjab and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others
[(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking
S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to
non compoundable offence where the parties have settled the
matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under
S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and
circumstances of the case or to ensure ends of justice or to
prevent abuse of process of any Court.
8. The dispute in the above case is purely personal in
nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely
Crl.M.C.No.2704 of 2022
..5..
affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A2
Final Report in C.C.No.199/2019 on the file of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta. The offences in
question do not fall within the category of offences prohibited
for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex
Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and
Laxmi Narayan (supra).
For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no
purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any
further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A2 Final
Report in C.C.No.199/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta hereby stands quashed.
Sd/-
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH,
JUDGE
skj
Crl.M.C.No.2704 of 2022
..6..
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2704/2022
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure- A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.843/2013 OF KOIPURAM POLICE
STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, DATED
9/09/2013
Annexure-A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.843/2013 OF KOIPURAM POLICE
STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, DATED
29/10/2013
Annexure-A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
31/10/2017 IN C.C NO 89/2014 ON THE
FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PATHANAMTHITTA
Annexure-A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
25/02/2019 IN C.C NO 1300/2017 ON THE
FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT -II PATHANAMTHITTA
Annexure-A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5/04/2022
Annexur-A6 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE
3RD RESPONDENT DATED 5/04/2022
Annexure-A7 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE
4TH RESPONDENT DATED 5/04/2022
Annexure-A8 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE
5TH RESPONDENT DATED 5/04/2022
