Allowed

Yahya T S v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2019Crl.MC/464/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings against two accused for an offence under Sections 353 and 34 IPC. The court held the dispute was private, no serious injury was sustained, and parties had amicably settled, making continued trial oppressive.

What did the court decide?

The pending proceedings C.C.No.932 of 2015 against the petitioners before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam are quashed.

Yahya T S Vs the State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 464 of 2019

¶6

CC 932/2015 of ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM

¶7

CRIME NO. 696/2012 OF Ernakulam Town North Police Station, Ernakulam

¶8

PETITIONERS/2ND AND 3RD ACCUSED:

¶9

1 YAHYA T. S., AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.SULAIMAN, ADIL APARTMENTS, MYTHRIPURAM ROAD, NEAR NGO QUARTERS, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682 021, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT THACHAKUNNIL HOUSE, MUNDAKAPPADAM ROAD, CHERANALLORE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 034.

¶10

2 HASHIM, S/O. HANEEFA, KANJIRATHINKAL HOUSE, KARIMAKKAD, VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 021.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED

¶12

RESPONDENTS/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶13

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶14

2 THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA STATE WAKF BOARD, HEAD OFFICE, VIP ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017.

¶15

R2 BY ADVS. SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A SMT.M.A.SULFIA

¶16

R1 BY SRI. AJITH MURALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Crl.MC.No. 464 of 2019

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

¶22

The petitioners herein are accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C.No.932 of 2015 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. The 1^st accused in the aforesaid case was discharged by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by Annexure-A2 order. The petitioners are being proceeded against for having committed offence punishable under Section 353 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

¶23

The crux of the prosecution allegation is that on account of prior animosity, on 19.04.2012 at about 4.15 p.m., the petitioners and the 1^st accused entered the office of the Wakf Board and deterred the officers from discharging their official duty.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the party respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the victim and the offenders have arrived at a compromise and narrating the said fact, the victim has filed an affidavit before this

¶26

Crl.MC.No. 464 of 2019

¶27

¶28

Court. According to the learned counsel, the records would reveal that no serious injuries were sustained by the victim. The termination of proceedings would resolve a festering private dispute between the parties and it is prayed that the proceedings be quashed. The learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent would also refer to the affidavit and it is submitted that the parties have not only buried the hatchet, but also have decided to live peacefully in future. According to the learned counsel, no purpose would be served in dragging these proceedings.

¶29

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners are not persons with criminal antecedents and that the State has no grievance in quashing the proceedings as no public interest is involved.

¶30

It is thus borne out from the submissions made at the bar that the parties have amicably settled their disputes on their own free will and without any kind of pressure, influence or coercion. The compromise, it is felt, is voluntary and genuine, and can be acted upon.

¶31

8. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303],

¶32

the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can

¶33

Crl.MC.No. 464 of 2019

¶34

¶35

take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab. [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653] .

¶36

Having considered the submissions advanced and on perusing the records, it appears that the offence alleged is entirely personal in nature and does not affect public peace or tranquility. The injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It is also

¶37

felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace. In a case such as the instant one, 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.

¶38

In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1 final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners

¶39

Crl.MC.No. 464 of 2019

¶40

¶41

now pending as C.C.No.932 of 2015 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam are quashed.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,

¶44

JUDGE

¶45

DSV/16.3.19

¶46

Crl.MC.No. 464 of 2019

¶47

¶48

APPENDIX

¶49

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶50

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 31/08/2012 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/12/2016 IN CMP NO.2521/2016 IN CC NO.932/2015 OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM.

¶51

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶52

NIL

¶53

//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE

Yahya T S v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yahya T S v. the 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

Mercy.P.Joy Vs State of Kerala

Johnson Gilbert Vs the Sub-Collector and Secretary, Nehru Trophy Race Society

K.P.Yousef Vs M.K.Abdul Saleem

Johnkutty.M.v Vs State of Kerala

Sindhu Jibi Vs State of Kerala

Vidhin.K. Vs State of Kerala