Xxxxxx vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 6649 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
  TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1945

                    CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 1035/2022 OF SPECIAL COURT
           FOR SC/ST ATROCITIES ACT CASES, THRISSUR

PETITIONER/S:

            XXXXXXXXXX
            XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

            BY ADVS.
            P.K.VARGHESE
            M.T.SAMEER
            DHANESH V.MADHAVAN
            P.S.ANISHAD
            JERRY MATHEW
            BIJU KUMAR
            SOJAN K. VARGHESE
            ARJUN KUMAR K.S.
            REGHU SREEDHARAN
            APARNA ANIL
            RAMEEZ M. AZEEZ
            NAMITHA K.S.
            SUDARSANAN U.
            ANU ASHOKAN
            ATHUL.P

RESPONDENT/S:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031

    2       XXXXXXXXXX
            XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX

    3       XXXXXXXXXX (MINOR)
            XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
            REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO. 2 FATHER

            SRI. T R RENJITH, SR. PP



     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023

                                        2



                                     ORDER

This petition is filed invoking the powers of this Court under Section

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code" for the sake of

brevity).

2. The petitioner herein is the accused in S.C.No.1035 of 2022 on

the files of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases,

Thirussr. In the said case, he is accused of having committed offences

punishable under Sections 3(2)(va), 3(2)(vii) of the Scheduled Castes and

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

the crime was registered based on information furnished by a Juvenile. The

allegation is that while the de facto complainant was a student in the

Pre-Matric Hostel, the petitioner who was a warden there, had beaten him

with a stick.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

the parties have settled their disputes and they are not desirous of pursuing

the prosecution proceedings. Reliance is placed on Annexure- 2 affidavit

filed by the 2nd respondent, who is the father of the juvenile to substantiate

his contention. According to the learned counsel, if the proceedings are

terminated, recording the amicable settlement, the parties can embark upon

their future paths in an atmosphere of tranquility and mutual respect. CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023

5. When the matter had come up for admission, this court had

directed the investigating officer concerned to record the statement of the

defacto complainant/injured/victim and report as to whether the assertion in

the petition and the affidavit filed in support that entire disputes have been

resolved between the parties concerned is true and genuine. The

investigating officer was also directed to report as to whether the petitioner

is a person with criminal antecedents and whether there is any other

impediment in terminating the criminal proceedings.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the statement of

the guardian, as well as the victim, has been recorded by the Police. It is

also submitted that no other transgressions or complaints stand registered

against the petitioner hitherto. It is further submitted that the statement of

the party respondent has been recorded, and he has unequivocally

expressed that he harbors no enduring grievances.

7. I have considered the submissions and have gone through the

records.

8. In State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan,1 a three-judge bench of

the Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarised the law as laid down in Gian

Singh v. State of Punjab2, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab3, State

[(2019) 5 SCC 688]

(2012) 10 SCC 303

2014 (6) SCC 466 CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023

of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat4, State of M.P. v. Deepak5, State of

M.P. v. Manish6, J. Ramesh Kamath v. Mohana Kurup7, State of M.P.

v. Rajveer Singh8, Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat9, State of

M.P. v. Kalyan Singh10 and State of M.P. v. Dhruv Gurjar11. It was laid

down as under:

15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this

Court on the point referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held

as under:

15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 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; 15.2. 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; 15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the 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;

(2014) 4 SCC 149

(2014) 10 SCC 285

(2015) 8 SCC 307

2016) 12 SCC 179

(2016) 12 SCC 471

(2017) 9 SCC 641

(2019) 4 SCC 268

(2019) 5 SCC 570] CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023

15.4. Offences under Section 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 Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 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 Section 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 Section 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 Section 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/delicate 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 paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;

15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offenses, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact 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 CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023

absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise, etc.

9. Having carefully analyzed the nature of the allegations, the

gravity of the offense, the severity of injuries inflicted, antecedents of the

petitioner, and the amicable relationship that now exists between the

parties, I am of the considered opinion that the quashing of proceedings on

the basis of the settlement will not have any adverse impact on the society

and it would only inure to bring about peace and secure the ends of justice.

Even otherwise, persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a

waste of time as the prospects of conviction are bleak. Having considered all

the relevant circumstances, I am confident that this Court will be well

justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code

to quash the proceedings.

Resultantly, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-1 Final Report in

Crime No.64/2022 of Athirappally Police Station and all further proceedings

pending against the petitioner as S.C.No.1035 of 2022 on the files of the

Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Thirussr are

quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

avs CRL.MC NO. 4428 OF 2023

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4428/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 29.07.2022 IN S.C.NO.1035/2022 ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA) ACT CASES, THRISSUR WHICH ARISE FROM CRIME NO.

64/2022 OF ATHIRAPALLY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT

Annexure A2 COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28.02.2023.