Kerala High Court
Muhammed Faseen N vs State Of Kerala on 4 February, 2025
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 15TH MAGHA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 10428 OF 2024
CRIME NO.209/2019 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.25 OF 2021 OF
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,MANJERI
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 MUHAMMED FASEEN N
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. NOUSHAD, CHARUVIL PUTHEN VEETIL HOUSE,
KOTTAMKARA, MAMOOD, CHANDANTHOP POST, KOLLAM, PIN
- 691014
2 MUHAMMED RASWIN
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. NOUSHAD, CHARUVILA PUTHAN VEED HOUSE,
MAMOOD, CHANDANATHOP POST, KOLLAM, PIN - 691014
3 SHAFI SHAJAHAN
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O. SHAJAHAN, SHYNI MANZIL, CHUZHUVANCHIRA
VAYAL, EDAVATTOM, CHANDANTHOP POST, KOLLAM, PIN -
691014
4 SUNIL KUMAR K
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. KUMAR G, PARASSERI VADAKKETHIL HOUSE, VENAD
NAGAR, KILIKOLLUR POST, KOLLAM, PIN - 691004
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
2
5 SAIDALI S
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. SHAJAHAN P, SHEEJA MANZIL, PERINAD,
CHATANAMKULAM, CHANTHOPP POST, KOLLAM, PIN -
691014
6 SHARIKRISHNA R.S.
AGED 36 YEARS
W/O. RAJESH MR, SRKPRAB 17, NETTAYAM POST,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695013
BY ADV E.C.AHAMED FAZIL
RESPONDENTS/STATE-COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDAVANNA
EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, EDAVANNA POST,
MALAPPURAM DISTIRCT, PIN - 676541
3 VIMALA
AGED 60 YEARS
W/O. VALAYUDHAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, PONTHOTTAM,
PATHRIYAL POST, THIIIRUVALI, MALAPPURM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676123
4 RATHEESH
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. VELAYUDHAN, THAYYIL HOUSE, PONTHOTTAM,
PATHRIYAL POST, THIIIRUVALI, MALAPPURM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676123
5 VELAYUDHAN
AGED 73 YEARS
S/O. UNNIMAKKU, THAYYIL HOUSE, PONTHOTTAM,
PATHRIYAL POST, THIIIRUVALI, MALAPPURM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676123
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
3
BY ADV A AL FAYAD
E.C. BINEESH -PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING::
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
4
C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
=======================
Crl.M.C No.10428 of 2024
========================
Dated this the 4th day of February, 2025
ORDER
A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High
Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab
and Another [(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad
guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal
proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect
of offences which are not compoundable in terms of
Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was
that the offences against human body, other than
murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be
compounded, when the court is in a position to record
a finding that the settlement between the parties is
voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with
approval by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and
another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in Narinder
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
Singh and Others v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC
466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the extent
of sanctioning invocation of the inherent power under
section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash
the F.I.R in a crime alleging offences under Section
307, which is a henious and serious offence. A
practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble
Supreme in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab
[(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in respect of
offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant
findings of which are extracted herebelow:
"6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps
advisable that in disputes where the question
involved is of a purely personal nature, the
court should ordinarily accept the terms of
the compromise even in criminal proceedings as
keeping the matter alive with no possibility
of a result in favour of the prosecution is a
luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened
as they are, cannot afford and that the time
so saved can be utilised in deciding more
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
effective and meaningful litigation. This is a
common sense approach to the matter based on
ground of realities and bereft of the
technicalities of the law."
2. In the facts at hand, petitioners are the accused
persons in Crime No.209 of 2019 of Edavanna Police
Station, Malappuram, now pending as C.C.No.25/2021
before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri.
The offences alleged are under Sections 109, 120B,
143, 147, 452, 341, 323, 354, 506(ii) read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners
seek quashment of entire proceedings in the above
Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement
arrived at by and between the parties.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners,
learned counsel for the defacto complainant/respondent
no. 3 and respondent nos. 4 & 5 and the learned Senior
Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
4. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to
record the statement of the defacto complainant. The
said direction was complied and the statements of the
defacto complainant (3rd respondent herein) and
respondent nos.4 and 5, the injured persons, were
handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that
the issues between the petitioners, the defacto
complainant and respondents nos.4 and 5, are settled
in mediation and that the petitioners have agreed to
reimburse the hospital and other associated expenses
to the respondent nos.3 to 5. Furthermore, they have
no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings
against the petitioners. That apart, it is noticed
that, along with this Crl.M.C, an affidavit has been
sworn to by the defacto complainant (3rd respondent
herein) as Annexure-A2, wherein she would
unequivocally state that the disputes have been
amicably settled and that the complaint stemmed from
misunderstanding. The defacto complainant would also
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
swear that she has no surviving grievance against the
petitioners and that she does not intent to proceed
with the prosecution case against the petitioners, any
further. The affidavit is sworn to on her own
volition. This Court also takes note of Annexures-A3
& A4 affidavits sworn to by the respondent nos.4 &
5, the injured persons, wherein they would also
vouch the factum of settlement. This Court is
therefore convinced that the settlement arrived at is
genuine and bonafide.
5. In the light of the above referred facts, this
Court is of the opinion that the necessary parameters,
as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra), Madan Mohan
Abbot (supra) and Gian Singh (Supra), are fully
satisfied. This court is convinced that further
proceedings against the petitioner will be a futile
exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been
settled. There is little possibility of any conviction
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
in the crime. Dehors the settlement arrived at by and
between the parties, if they are compelled to face the
criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of
this Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court.
The quashment sought for would secure the ends of
justice. This Court also notice that offences under
Sections 323, 341 and 506 are compoundable, which is
all the more a reason to accept the compromise between
the parties.
In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed.
Annexure-A1 Final Report in Crime No. 209/2019, and
all further proceedings in C.C.No.25/2021 of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate Court, Manjeri, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
C.JAYACHANDRAN,JUDGE
Pvv
2025:KER:10219
CRL.MC NO.10428 OF 2024
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10428/2024
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 09.12.2020 IN CRIME NO. 209 OF
2019 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM ALONG WITH MEMORANDUM OF
EVIDENCE
ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT DATED 02.08.2024 SWORN BY
THIRD RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT DATED 02.08.2024 SWORN BY
FOURTH RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE A4 AFFIDAVIT DATED 02.08.2024 SWORN BY
FIFTH RESPONDENT
