The High Court of Kerala allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR and proceedings for Sections 153(A) and 326 IPC. The court found an amicable settlement between the accused and complainants, holding that further prosecution would not serve any purpose.
FIR and further proceedings in Crime No. 1075/2011 of Hosdurg Police Station quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2015/11TH PHALGUNA, 1936
Crl.MC.No. 81 of 2015 ()
CRIME NO. 1075/2011 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION , KASARGOD DISTRICT ===============
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1-13:
1. SUBAIR, AGED 38 YEARS
2. C.H.ISAHAQ, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.KUNHAHAMMED, RESIDING AT CHAMUNDIKUNNU
3. A.P.ABDUL BASHEER, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.A.P.ABBAS, RESIDING AT MUNAYANCODE, CHAMUNDIKUNNU
4. M.HYDER, AGED 22 YEARS
5. C.H.NISSAR, AGED 33 YEARS
6. M.HASSAN, AGED 39 YEARS
7. C.H.AZIZ, AGED 38 YEARS S/O.KUNHAHAMMED, RESIDING AT C.H.HOUSE, CHAMUNDIKUNNU CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
8. C.H.MUHAMMED ASHARAF, AGED 42 YEARS S/O.ABDULLA, RESIDING AT FAIZAL MANZIL, CHITHARI CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
9. C.H.MUJEEV REHIMAN, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.ABOOBACKER, RESIDING AT CHAMUNDIKUNNU
-2-
Crl.MC.No. 81 of 2015
10. NUHMAN ALI, AGED 22 YEARS S/O.ISAHAK, RESIDING AT BAITHUL MUNNA HOUSE CHAMMUNDIKUNNU, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
11. ALI HYDER, AGED 18 YEARS S/O.BASHEER, RESIDING AT VERLLIKKOTHU, CHAMMUNDIKUNNU CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
12. SHAMSEER A.V., S/O.ABBAS, RESIDING AT KOTTILANGADU, CHAMMUNIDKUNNU CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
13. MUHAMMED KUNHI @ MAMMAD, AGED 49 YEARS S/O.ABDULLA, RESIDING AT MUNAYAMCODE, CHITHARI VILLAGE HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1. THE STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER HOSDURG POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2. JAYAN, AGED 45 YEARS
3. V.KUNHIRAMAN, AGED 52 YEARS S/O.KOTTAN, RESIDING AT NITHIN NIVAS, RAMAGIRI RAVANESHWARAM, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671316.
R2,R3 BY ADV. SMT.BINDUMOL JOSEPH R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S. HYMA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-03-2015, ALONG WITH CRMC. 80/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 81 of 2015 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE 1 : TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1075/2011 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 3 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DT.16-11-13 SUBMITTED BY R1 BEFORE THE JFCM I HOSDURG.
ANNEXURE 4 : AFFIDAVIT DT.29-11-14 SWORN IN BY R2.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
NIL
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
SD
P. UBAID, J.
Crl.M.C. No.81 of 2015
Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2015
The petitioners seek orders quashing the F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No. 1075/2011 of the Hosdurg Police Station, registered under Sections 153(A) and 326 IPC on the complaint of one Jayan. Orders are sought on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between the accused and the de facto complainant out of court. The de facto complainant Jayan is the 2nd respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He has filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the whole dispute with the accused and he has no grievance or complaint The other person who sustained injuries in the alleged incident is the respondent No.3 in this proceeding. He has also filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the dispute with the accused and he has no grievance or complaint now.
In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution; be it at the crime stage or at the
2
Crl.M.C. No.81 of 2015
trial stage or even at the appellate or revision stage; if the parties have really settled the whole dispute, or if continuance of prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, I find a real case of settlement between the parties, and I also find that continuance of prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court.
In the result, this petition is allowed. The F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No.1075/2011 of the Hosdurg Police Station, will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE
sd
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC in a non-compoundable offence where the parties have amicably settled the dispute.
Whether continuance of prosecution serves any purpose given the settlement between the accused and the complainants.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SUBAIR AND OTHERS
STATE OF KERALA
JAYAN
V. KUNHIRAMAN
P. UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
