Allowed

Vysakh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Nov 2016Crl.MC/4815/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala exerted its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash pending criminal proceedings against the applicants. The court accepted a settlement reached between the accused and the victim, citing that quashing would secure the ends of justice and promote peace, noting the bleak prospects of conviction.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings under Crime No. 1228 of 2016 registered at Thrikkakara Police Station against the petitioners were quashed.

Vysakh Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/24TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4815 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 1228/2016 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

VYSAKH S.P S/O. SIVANKUTTY, AGED 25 YEARS, UZHINJATHU HOUSE, CHETTIMOOLA ROAD, VAZHAKKALA, THRIKKAKARA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.C.AJITH KUMAR (KALLESSERIL) SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL)

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO 1228 OF 2016 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION)

¶12

2. THAHA AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. ALIKUNJU KUNNEPARAMBU VEEDU, VAZHAKKALA THRIKKAKARA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 021

¶13

R2 BY ADV. SRI.JELSON J.EDAMPADAM R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI.

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-11-2016, ALONG WITH CRMC. 5133/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.MC.No. 4815 of 2016 () ---------------------------

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶18

ANNEXURE A1 PHOTOCOPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO 1228 OF 2016 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION

¶19

ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶20

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE.

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J

¶25

¶26

Crl.M.C. Nos. 4815 & 5133 of 2016

¶27

- - - - Dated 15^th November, 2016

¶28

¶29

ORDER

¶30

1.This petition is filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( hereinafter referred to as the Code ) with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings.

¶31

2.The petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.4815 of 2016 is the 1^st accused and the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.5133 of 2016 are accused 2 to 5 in Crime No.1228 of 2016 of Thrikkakara Police Station. The aforesaid crime has been registered at the instance of the 2^nd respondent in both the cases alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 506(ii), 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 of the IPC.

¶32

3.The prosecution allegation is that on 23.7.2016 at 10.15 p.m, the petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common

¶33

Crl.M.C. Nos. 4815 & 5133 of 2016 -2-

¶34

object wrongfully restrained the 2^nd respondent herein and thereafter assaulted him causing injuries.

¶35

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶36

5.The 2^nd respondent has appeared in person before this Court. He has stated that the affidavit produced in both the cases has been sworn to by him and he asserts that he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners. The learned counsel appearing for the parties urges that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not affect public peace or tranquility. Summing up it is prayed that the criminal proceedings be terminated to promote peace and harmony.

¶37

6.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has expressed his reservations in the matter of quashing the proceedings on the basis of settlement. It is

¶38

Crl.M.C. Nos. 4815 & 5133 of 2016 -3-

¶39

submitted that the invocation of powers under Section 482

¶40

of the Code in a case of this nature is not warranted. However, it is submitted that no other cases are reported against the petitioners.

¶41

7.I have considered the submissions.

¶42

8.In Gian singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303

¶43

Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows :

¶44

“61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction

¶45

Crl.M.C. Nos. 4815 & 5133 of 2016 -4-

¶46

to quash the criminal proceedings.”

¶47

9.The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court

¶48

in Narinder singh v. State of Punjab. (2014) 6 SCC

¶49

466, the pertinent observations which are as under:

¶50

XXXXXXXXXXXX

¶51

29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:

¶52

(i) ends of justice, or

¶53

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.

¶54

xxxxxxx

¶55

xxxxxxx

¶56

10.The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said

¶57

to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society. It is

¶58

felt that quashing of proceedings on account of

¶59

Crl.M.C. Nos. 4815 & 5133 of 2016 -5-

¶60

compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice. Even otherwise, persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a waste of time as the prospects of conviction would be bleak.

¶61

11.Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in invoking its extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings.

¶62

In the result, these petitions will stand allowed. Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No. 1228 of 2016 of Thrikkakara Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed.

¶63

Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., JUDGE

¶64

kp/-15.11.16

Vysakh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vysakh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babu Vs State of Kerala

Rakesh Vs the Sub Inspector of Police, Karamana

Hashim Vs State of Kerala

Salam P.K. Vs State of Kerala

Eby Alphonse Vs State of Kerala

K. Firdouz Vs State of Kerala