Ranjith vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 10511 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 24TH ASWINA, 1945
                     CRL.MC NO. 7948 OF 2023
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 153/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                       FIRST CLASS ,ALATHUR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 to 3:

    1     RANJITH
          AGED 30 YEARS
          S/O RAVI. KALARIKKAL HOUSE, CHEGANIYOOR, MATHUR P.O.,
          ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678571
    2     KANNAN @ MURALEEDHARAN
          AGED 33 YEARS
          S/O BALAN, PALATTU THODI HOUSE, KARAPPOTTA, KANNAMBARA
          P.O., ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678686
    3     RAVEENDRAN
          AGED 56 YEARS
          S/O V.C RAJAN, KALAMKULAM HOUSE, VADAKKENCHERY P.O.,
          ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678683
          BY ADVS.
          K.N.ABHILASH
          SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
          T.R.ANIL VENUGOPAL


RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT::

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          PIN - 682031
    2     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
          VADAKANCHERRY POLICE STATION, PALAKAD, PIN - 678683
    3     ULLAS
          AGED 51 YEARS
          S/O PRAKASSAN, KALATHIL HOUSE,PANNIYANKARA P.O,
          KANNAMBARA, PALAKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678686
    4     AJEESH
          AGED 27 YEARS
          S/O BHASKARAN, MUDAVARTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, PANNIYANKARA
          P.O., VADAKKANCHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 6, PIN - 678686
 CRL.MC NO. 7948 OF 2023             2



     5       SAJITH
             AGED 22 YEARS
             S/O CHANDRABABU, CHEVAKKAD HOUSE, PARUVASSERRY P.O.,
             KANNAMBRA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678686
OTHER PRESENT:

             RENJITH TR PP
             T.J.LAKSHMANAN IYER


      THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 7948 OF 2023               3




                       P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                       --------------------------------
                      Crl.M.C. No.7948 of 2023
                ----------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 16th day of October, 2023

                                 ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of

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

brevity).

2. The petitioners are the accused in CC No.153/2023 on the

file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alathur arising from

Crime No.100/2023 of Vadakancherry Police Station, Palakkad. The

above case is charge sheeted alleging offences punishable under

Sections 341, 324, 506(ii) r/w 34 of IPC.

3. The prosecution case is that the accused wrongfully

confined the victim and assaulted the victim. It is also submitted

that the accused criminally intimidated the victim.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to pursue the

prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on the affidavit filed by

the victims in support of his contention. The counsel appearing for

the victims also submitted that the matter is settled and the victims

have no objection in quashing the prosecution.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has

expressed reservations about quashing the proceedings solely on

the basis of the settlement. But the Public Prosecutor conceded

that the matter is settled between the parties.

6. This Court has considered the submission of the petitioner,

victim/s and the Public Prosecutor and has also gone through the

records including the affidavits filed by the victims.

7. In State of Madhya Pradesh v Laxmi Narayan and

Others (2019 (5) SCC 688), three judge bench of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court has summarized the situation in which non

compoundable offences can be quashed invoking the powers under

Section 482 of the Code. The apex court in Laxmi Narayan's case

(supra) also relied on the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of

Punjab and another (2012 (10) SCC 303) and Narinder Singh

and others v. State of Punjab and another (2014 (6) SCC

466). The apex court in paragraph 13 of the Laxmi Narayan's

case discussed the law in detail and the same is extracted

hereunder:

"13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to herein above, it is observed and held as under:

i) that the power conferred under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non

- compoundable offences under S.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;

ii) 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;

iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like 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;

iv) offences under S.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 S.307 IPC and / or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under S.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 S.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 S.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 S.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 / delegate 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 paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated herein above;

v) while exercising the power under S.482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart 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 absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc."

8. Keeping in mind the above dictum laid down by the apex

court, this court perused the facts in this case and also perused the

documents produced by the parties. After going through the entire

facts and circumstances I am of the considered opinion that the

dispute is private in nature and the settlement can be accepted.

Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. All

further proceedings against the petitioners in CC No.153/2023 on

the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Alathur arising

from Crime No.100/2023 of Vadakancherry Police Station, Palakkad

are quashed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE ska

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7948/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO-100/2023 DATED 02/02/2023 OF THE VADAKANCHERRY POLICE STATION, PALAKAD DISTRICT Annexure-A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 22.02.2023 IN CC NO. 153/2023 OF THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, ALATHUR IN FIR-100/2023 OF THE VADAKANCHERRY POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT DATED 02.02.2023 Annexure-A3 THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 09.09.2023 Annexure-A4 THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 09.09.2023 Annexure-A5 THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 09.09.2023