Jom Chemmannoor John vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 10513 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. 7934 OF 2023
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 842/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                     FIRST CLASS -I,THRISSUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED

          JOM CHEMMANNOOR JOHN
          AGED 25 YEARS
          S/O JOHN CHEMMANNOOR, CHEMMANNOOR HOUSE, MACHAD MALAKKA
          DESOM, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
          PIN - 680589
          BY ADVS.
          ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN
          C.DHEERAJ RAJAN


RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & VICTIM

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          PIN - 682031
    2     AKASH
          AGED 27 YEARS
          S/O JAYARAJAN, KATTAPURATH HOUSE, THIRUVARPPU DESOM,
          THIRUVARPPU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686020
    3     SHIJO K. THOMAS
          AGED 46 YEARS
          S/O K.V. THOMAS, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOOVAPALLI,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686518
OTHER PRESENT:

          RENJITH TR PP
          DENU JOSEPH


     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. 7934 OF 2023               2




                       P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                       --------------------------------
                      Crl.M.C. No.7934 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 petitioner is the accused in CC No.842/2023 on

the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur

arising from Crime No.1379/2023 of Thrissur East Police

Station.

3. The above case is charge sheeted against the

petitioner alleging offence punishable under Section 380 of

the IPC. The prosecution case is that accused committed

theft.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the parties have settled their dispute and do not wish to

pursue the prosecution proceedings. The counsel relies on

the affidavits 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, victims 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 petitioner in CC

No.842/2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate

Court-I, Thrissur arising from Crime No.1379/2023 of Thrissur

East Police Station are quashed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

ska

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7934/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH THE STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 1379/2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT DATED 01.06.2023 Annexure 2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1379/2023 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT NOW PENDING AS CC NO. 842/2023 PENDING ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- I, THRISSUR DATED 06.06.2023 Annexure 3 THE ATTESTED COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 26.09.2023 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure 4 THE ATTESTED COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 26.09.2023 SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT