Kerala High Court

Rahul Krishnan vs State Of Kerala on 23 April, 2024

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
       TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 3RD VAISAKHA, 1946
                              CRL.MC NO. 1323 OF 2024
             CRIME NO.1579/2021 OF Valiyathura Police Station,
                                 Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST      THE   ORDER/JUDGMENT     DATED     IN   SC    NO.1801     OF   2022   OF
ASSISTANT             SESSIONS         COURT/II                ADDITIONAL          SUB
COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONERS/A2 & A4:

       1       RAHUL KRISHNAN
               AGED 26 YEARS
               S/O. RADAKRISHNAN, AYANIKKADU HOUSE, T.C.36/456,
               PALKULANGARA, PERUNTHANNI WARD, PETTAH VILLAGE,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695024
       2       RAJESH. V., AGED 26 YEARS
               S/O. VIJAYAN, PLAMOOTIL HOUSE, T.C.77/2669, VAYYAMOOLA,
               CHAKA WARD, PETTAH VILLAGE,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695024
               BY ADV SHAJIN S.HAMEED


RESPONDENTS/STATE/ & CW1:
     1     STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
           KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
     2     JIJIMON @ KANNAN
           AGED 42 YEARS
           S/O. VIJAYAN, SIVA DEEPAM HOUSE, T.C.31/1783, NEAR
           KARALI BRIDGE, CHAKKA WARD, PETTAH VILLAGE,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695024



               SRI SONAY JOHN -R2,
                SMT, SHEEBA THOMAS PP
THIS       CRIMINAL   MISC.    CASE   HAVING    COME      UP    FOR   ADMISSION     ON
23.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 1323 OF 2024               2




              P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN J.
         ........................................................................

                  Crl.M.C.No. 1323 of 2024
                   .........................................
            Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2024

                              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 S.C No.1801/2022

on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court-III/II Additional

Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram, arising from Crime

No.1579/2021 of Valiyathura police station,

Thiruvananthapuram district. The above case is

chargesheeted against the petitioners and others alleging

commission of offences punishable under Sections 427, 447,

294(b), 323 and 308 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case is that, due to enmity that CW1

informed the police to the effect that accused Nos.2 to 4

consume alcohol adjacent to the property next to his house,

on 21.08.2021, at 08.30 pm, accused persons trespassed into

the compound of the house of CW1 and attacked him and

thereby the accused committed the offences alleged against

them.

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 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.

6. This Court has considered the submission of the

petitioners, 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:

"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 in S.C. No.1801/2022 on the file of

the Assistant Sessions Court-III/II Additional Sub Court,

arising from Crime No.1579/2021 of Valiyathura Police

Station, as against the petitioners, are quashed.

Sd/-