The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against petitioners accused of trespass and mischief arising from a civil lease dispute, holding that the matter was settled between parties and predominantly civil in nature.
Cr.MC. No. 4448 of 2016 was allowed; all further proceedings in Crime No. 218/2014 and C.C. No. 900/2015 were 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 ASHOK MENON
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 4448 of 2016(E)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 900/2015 of JUDL.M.F.C.-I,ERNAKULAM CRIME NO. 218/2014 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S):
1 ARJUNAN, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O GOKUL VERMA, RESIDING AT AMARAVATHI, ULLASANOON ROAD, CHERTHALA, ALAPUZHA 688 524.
AGED 25 YEARS, S/O SALIM, RESIDING AT 13/230, KOCHANGADI ROAD, MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM 682 002.
3 SHIJAS,
AGED 21 YEARS, S/O SHAMSUDDIN, RESIDING AT SAUDI HOUSE, POOCHAKAL, PANAVALLI, CHERTHALA, ALAPUZHA 688 526.
BY ADV.SRI.R.V.SUJIT KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 11.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM 682 025.
3. JOSEPH VILANGADAN, S/O ULAHANNAN, AGED 72 YEARS, VILANGADAN HOUSE, MAMANGALAM, KOCHI 25.
R1-R2 BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.P.THAJUDHEEN
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 4448 of 2016 (E)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
| ANNEXURE I |
COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CC NO 900 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATES COURT-I, ERNAKULAM. |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE II |
COPY OF COMMISSION REPORT DATED 13-03-2014 IN O.S NO 197 OF 2014 OF MUNSIFFS COURT, ERNAKULAM. |
| ANNEXURE III | COPY OF SITE MAHAZAR IN CRIME NO.218/14 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION CC NO.900 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ERNAKULAM. |
| ANNEXURE IV | COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.218/14 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION IN CC NO.900 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATES COURT-I, ERNAKULAM. |
| ANNEXURE V | COPY OF INJUNCTION SCHEDULE IN O.S.197 OF 2014 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. |
| ANNEXURE VI | COPY OF INJUNCTION ORDER IN O.S.NO.197 OF 2014 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. |
| ANNEXURE VII | COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.197 OF 2014 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, ERNAKULAM. |
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
dkr
ASHOK MENON, J.
Crl.M.C. No. 4448 of 2016
------------------------------------------Dated this the 2nd day of March, 2018
O R D E R
The petitioners are accused 2 to 4 in C.C.No.900/2015 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IX,Ernakulam. On the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent alleging offences under Sections 427, 447 read with Section 34, I.P.C., crime No.218/2014 was registered at Palarivattom Police Station and after investigation, a final report was filed and taken on file as C.C.No.900/2015. The petitioners claim that they are all workers employed in a firm by name M/s Aasma Techno Products (P) Ltd., which is engaged in assembling of speed governors. The factory is working in the tenanted premises of the 3rd respondent, situated in Mamangalam in Ernakulam. There is some rivalry between the 3rd respondent and the tenant, who is the employer of the petitioners, in respect of lease and it is also understood that there is a civil suit was filed as O.S.No.197/2014 before the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam. A Commission report was filed in that suit, which is Annexure II. The allegation of the defacto
2
Crl.MC.4448/2016
complainant is that the tenant along with the petitioners had illegally trespassed into the disputed property and committed mischief. The petitioners are all employed in the factory belonging to the tenant and their entry to the factory cannot be termed as a criminal trespass, so long as they have a right to continue to work in the factory. That apart, any damage, which is allegedly caused to the landlord is something to be realised by way of a civil suit for compensation, consequent to the termination of the lease. The petitioners have nothing to do regarding payment of compensation for alleged mischief. Moreover, it is also stated that the civil suit pending before the Munsiff's Court has been disposed of consequent to the submission made by the 3rd respondent herein to the effect that he has no intention to evict the plaintiff, otherwise than by due process of law and that rent control proceedings are already initiated. Accordingly, the suit was dismissed vide Annexure VII judgment.
Crl.MC.4448/2016
3
is hereby quashed, exercising the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
ASHOK MENON Judge
dkr
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed in view of the parties having settled the civil dispute between them.
Whether the dispute has an overwhelming element of civil nature warranting exercise of inherent jurisdiction to quash the criminal case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arjunan
Shameer
Shijas
State of Kerala
Station House Officer, Palarivattom Police Station
Joseph Vilangadan
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
