Kerala High Court
Vinoj I M vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2023
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. 5391 OF 2023
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 593/2020 OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
VINOJ I M
AGED 43 YEARS, S/O MANI, ELLATHUKUDI (H)
PONJASSERY P.O, NORTH AZHEEPURAMKARA
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683547
BY ADVS.
K.S.ARUN KUMAR
SRUTHY UNNIKRISHNAN
AMRUTHA P S
JERIN JOSEPH
SAQIB RIZWAN
ELDHO BABY
AMRUTHA K P
ARYA B. VENUGOPAL
VIJAY SANKAR V.H.
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 MANAGING DIRECTOR
KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE CONSUMERS FEDERATION
LTD., GANDHINAGAR, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682020
BY ADVS.
SMT. SREEJA. V PP
SRI. M. SASINDRAN
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 16.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 5391 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. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to
quash the proceedings in C.C. No.593/2020 on the
file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,
Ernakulam arising from Crime No.1361/2016 of
Ernakulam Town North Police Station, in which the
petitioner is the 1st accused. The offences alleged
against the petitioner are punishable under
Sections 408,409, 477 r/w 34 of IPC.
3. It is submitted that the case against the
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
second accused is quashed by this Court as per
Annexure-l order. It is also submitted that the
case is already settled and the victim has no
grievance.
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 affidavit filed
by the victim in support of his contention. The counsel
appearing for the victim also submitted that the
matter is settled and the victim has 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.
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
6. This Court has considered the submission of
the petitioner, victim and the Public Prosecutor and
has also gone through the records including the
affidavit filed by the victim.
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:
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
"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
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
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
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
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 C.C. No.593/2020 on the file of
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,
Ernakulam arising from Crime No.1361/2016 of
Ernakulam Town North Police Station, are
quashed. Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
nvj JUDGE
CRL. M.C. NO.5391 OF 2023
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5391/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-I A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
31.01.2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
CRL.M.C NO. 9053/2019
ANNEXURE-II A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL
REPORT IN CC NO. 593/2020 ON THE
FILE OF THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, AT
ERNAKULAM DATED 02.09.2017
ANNEXURE-III A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4845
DATED 09.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE
KERALA CO-OPERATIVE CONSUMER'S
FEDERATION LTD
ANNEXURE-IV A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO. 4901
DATED 25.07.2018 ISSUED BY THE
KERALA CO-OPERATIVE CONSUMER'S
FEDERATION LTD
ANNEXURE-V A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
23.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
