High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings in C.C.No.505/2011 where petitioners and respondent were parties to a civil dispute settled via mediation. Noting remote possibility of conviction and mutual settlement, the Court held continuation would cause oppression and allowed quashing.
Proceedings in C.C.No.505 of 2011 shall stand 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 RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/26TH JYAISHTA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 2732 of 2016 ()
CC 505/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, MUVATUPUZHA.
CRIME NO. 430/2011 OF VAZHAKULAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAMDISTRICT.
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :
1. REGHU T.A, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. AYYAPPAN, THEKKEL HOUSE, NEDIYASALA KARA, PURAPPUZHA, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 608.
2. SANTHOSH, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.RAJAPPAN, NEDUNCHERIYIL HOUSE, MEMADANGU, ARAKUZHA, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 672.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G SRI.DIPU JAMES
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1.STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAZHAKULAM POLICE STATION-686 672, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
--2--
--2--
Crl.MC.No. 2732 of 2016 ()
2.SURESH D., AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.DAMODARAN, CHERADIYIL HOUSE, NAGAPUZHA P.O., KALLORKKAD, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-0686 668.
R2 BY ADVS.SRI.THOMAS M.JACOB SRI.AKHIL K.MADHAV SRI.T.R.JERRY SEBASTIAN R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
Crl.MC.No. 2732 of 2016 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE A1 : TRUE COPY OF FIR NO.430 OF 2011 DTD.10.11.2011. ANNEXURE A2 : TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT DTD.26.11.2011. ANNEXURE A3 : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT INCLUDING THE TERMS OF MEDIATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT DTD.15.1.2014 IN RFA NO.785 OF 2013(I).
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL ------------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J
Crl.M.C. No. 2732 of 2016
ORDER
1.The petitioners herein are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C.No.505 of 2011 of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Muvattupuzha. The said case has arisen from Crime No.430 of 2011 of Vazhakulam Police Station. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant.
between the parties were settled as is evident from Annexure A3. It is submitted that as per Clause No.10 of Annexure A3, the 2nd respondent has asserted that he has
no grievance against the petitioner in respect of C.C.No.505 of 2011 now pending on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Muvattupuzha.
5.On a detailed assessment of the materials it is beyond cavil that even if the prosecution is allowed to continue, it would not serve any purpose as the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It can only result in putting the de facto complainant and the accused to unwanted oppression and prejudice. Settlement will augur well for the interest of the community and will enable the parties to live in peace and harmony.
Crl.M.C. No. 2732 of 2016 -3-
proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.505 of 2011 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the I Class, Muvattupuzha, shall stand quashed.
Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE
kp/-17.6.16
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC given a mediated settlement in the underlying civil dispute.
Whether continuing the prosecution serves any purpose when conviction is remote and mediation has settled parties.
Whether the de facto complainant has no objection to quashing the instant proceedings.
Reghu T.A
Santhosh
Suresh D.
State of Kerala
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
