Kerala High Court
Suresh vs State Of Kerala on 21 January, 2025
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 1ST MAGHA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 6276 OF 2024
CRIME NO.87/2022 OF CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.127 OF 2022 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHAVARA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:
1 SURESH
AGED 61 YEARS
H/O MINI, KONTHARA KIZHAKATHIL, VADAKUMTHALA
MEKKU MURIYIL, KOLLAM., PIN - 690536
2 MINI
AGED 58 YEARS
W/O SURESH, KONTHARA KIZHAKATHIL, VADAKUMTHALA
MEKKU MURIYIL, KOLLAM., PIN - 690536
3 ABHIJITH
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O SURESH, KONTHARA KIZHAKATHIL, VADAKUMTHALA
MEKKU MURIYIL, KOLLAM., PIN - 690536
4 SUDHEESH
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O SURESH, THARAYIL (H), VADAKUMTHALA MEKKU
MURIYIL, PANMANA VILLAGE., PIN - 691583
BY ADVS.
ELDHO.N.MONCY
P.PARVATHY
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
2
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT.,
PIN - 691583
3 SUDHEESH
AGED 38 YEARS
S/O SHANMUGHAN, KUNNUMPURATH (H), VADAKKUMTHALA
THEKKUMURIYIL, VADAKUMTHALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM.,
PIN - 690536
4 CHINJU
AGED 30 YEARS
W/O SUDHEESH, KUNNUMPURATH (H), VADAKKUMTHALA
THEKKUMURIYIL, VADAKUMTHALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM.,
PIN - 690536.
BY ADV SHERIL ABRAHAM
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 21.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
3
C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
=======================
Crl.M.C No.6276 of 2024
========================
Dated this the 21st day of January, 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
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in Narinder
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
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
so saved can be utilised in deciding more
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 accused in
Crime No.87 of 2022 of Chavara Police Station, Kollam,
now pending as C.C.No.127/2022 before the Judicial
First Class Magistrate Court, Chavara. The offences
alleged are under Sections 447, 341, 323 and 294(b)
read with Section 34 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 petitioner,
learned counsel for the defacto complainant/
respondent nos. 3 and 4, and the learned Senior
Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
4. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to
record the statements of the defacto complainant (3rd
respondent herein) and the injured (4th respondent
heriein). The said direction was complied and their
statements were handed over. On perusal of the same,
it is clear that the issues between the petitioners
and the defacto complainant/respondent nos.3 and 4
are settled amicably and that they have no objection
in quashing the criminal proceedings against the
petitioners. That apart, it is noticed that, along
with this Crl.M.C, affidavits have been sworn to by
the defacto complainant (3rd respondent herein) and 4th
respondent as Annexure-III and Annexure IV, wherein
they would unequivocally state that the disputes have
been settled and that the complaint stemmed from
misunderstanding. This Court is therefore convinced
that the settlement arrived at is genuine and
bonafide.
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
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
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 341, 323 and 447 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-I FIR and Annexure-II Final Report, and all
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
further proceedings in C.C.No.127/2022 of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate Court, Chavara, are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
C.JAYACHANDRAN,JUDGE
Pvv
2025:KER:4708
CRL.MC NO.6276 OF 2024
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
87 OF 2022 OF CHAVARA POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DATED 01.02.2022.
ANNEXURE II CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO. 87 OF 2022 OF CHAVARA POLICE
STATION DATED 26.02.2022.
ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 10.07.2024
ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 10.07.2024
