Allowed

Rmp Infotec Pvt.Ltd. Company, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Sept 2020Crl.MC/266/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the charge sheet in C.C.No.53/2019 and proceedings against 34 accused for cheating and money circulation offences. Finding a genuine settlement between parties, the Court held that continued prosecution would waste judicial time.

What did the court decide?

The impugned Annexure-I final report/charge sheet and all further proceedings against the petitioners were quashed and set aside.

Rmp Infotec Pvt.Ltd. Company, Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 27TH BHADRA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 53/2019 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE PALAKKAD

¶7

CRIME NO.21/2018 OF CBCID, KOZHIKODE , Kozhikode

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 RMP INFOTEC PVT.LTD. COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, DAVAL CHANDAN, APPOLO, DUBAI PLAZA BUILDING, MAHALINGAPURAM ROAD, CHENNAI- 34.

¶10

2 DAVAL CHANDAN, AGED 54 YEARS

¶11

S/O.JAWAHARMAL CHANDRAN, H.NO.25.(OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶12

3 RAJESH KUMAR CHANDAN, AGED 40 YEARS

¶13

S/O.JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H.NO.25.(OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶14

4 DILEEP KUMAR CHANDAN, AGED 43 YEARS

¶15

S/O.JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H.NO.25.(OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶16

5 PRAVEEN CHANDAN, AGED 45 YEARS

¶17

S/O.JAWAHARMAL CHANDAN, H.NO.25.(OLD NO.12-1), PERUMALMUTHALI STREET, ROYALPETTA, CHENNAI-14.

¶18

6 DAYALAN, AGED 41 YEARS

¶19

S/O.THUKKURAMAN, PLOT NO.57-1/KGR NAGAR, KATTUPAKKAM P.O., THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, CHENNAI-56.

¶20

7 M.SHAMSUDHEEN, AGED 61 YEARS

¶21

S/O.MUHAMMED ABDUL KHADER, ARAFA HOUSE, N.L.RA-51-A, NEERALI LANE, ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶22

8 SAJI PARAKKAL @ SAJI P.A.,

¶23

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶24

¶25

AGED 47 YEARS S/O.P.M.ANTONY, PARAKKAL HOUSE, PATTIKKAD P.O., THRISSUR.

¶26

9	P.V.ASOKAN, AGED 60 YEARS S/O.VELAYUDHAN, PULLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, AVINISSERY, OLLUR, THRISSUR.
10	STEEPHEN T.V., AGED 59 YEARS S/O.VAREED, THALAKKOTTOOR HOUSE, KECHERI P.O., THRISSUR.
11	JAMES MATHEW, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.MATHEW, SNEHASANDRAM, KANNORA P.O., PEECHI, THRISSUR.
12	C.V.SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 59 YEARS
	S/O.VELAYUDHEN, CHERAYATH HOUSE, CHETTUPUZHA P.O., THRISSUR.
13	JOSEPH SEBASTIAN, AGED 49 YEARS S/O.T.V.SEBASTIAN, PANDARAVALAPPIL HOUSE, CHETTUPPUZHA P.O., THRISSUR.
14	RENNY VARGHESE, AGED 49 YEARS S/O.VARGHESE, CHETTIYAMKUDIYIL HOUSE, PEEDIKAPARAMBIL NAGAR, VADAKAMCHERRY, PALAKKAD.
15	DHINIL KUMAR, AGED 49 YEARS S/O.KUMARAN, PULIYASSERY HOUSE, PARIYAPURAM, THANOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
16	N.SREENIVASAN, AGED 44 YEARS S/O.NARAYANAN, NAMBITHODI HOUSE, PARUTHIPULLI P.O., PALAKKAD.
17	K.P.SWAMINATHAN, AGED 43 YEARS
	S/O.PARAMESWARAN, KARYATTU HOUSE, PARUTHIKUZHI P.O., PERINGOTTYKURUSSY, PALAKKAD.
18	N.R.MANOHARAN,
	AGED 52 YEARS

¶27

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶28

¶29

S/O.RAGHAVAN, AMBADY HOUSE, CHANDRANAGAR P.O. PALAKKAD.

¶30

19 M.K.JOSE, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.KUNJUNJU, ORCHID MEDOWS, B15, KURUMAGIRI P.O., KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM.

¶31

20 K.PARTHASARATHI, AGED 53 YEARS S/O.KANDANKUTTY, DREAMS, CHANDRANAGAR, PALAKKAD.

¶32

21 SUNITHA, AGED 47 YEARS D/O.PARTHASARATHI, KOTHAPURATH HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMPURAM P.O., MANNUR, PALAKKAD.

¶33

22 RAVIKUMAR.M., AGED 38 YEARS S/O.RAMACHANARAN, MULLANTHODI HOUSE, ELUBILASSERY, KARIMBUZHA, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶34

23 RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 47 YEARS S/O.SANKARANKUTTY, MANALITHODI HOUSE, MANNAMPETTA, KADAMBAZHIPURAM, SREEKRISHNAPURAM, PALAKKAD.

¶35

24	SUNIL V.,
	AGED 41 YEARS
	S/O.VELAYUDHAN, OLIVAMPATTA, NALLEPPALI, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD.
25	MOHANAN M.,
	AGED 43 YEARS
	S/O.MUTHU, KARIYEDATH HOUSE, PERINGOTTUKURISSEY, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD.
26	K.V.MADHU,
	AGED 45 YEARS
	S/O.VASUDEVAN, KADAMKODE HOUSE, NADUVATAPPARA, PERINGOTTUKURISSEY, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD.
27	AJEESH JOHN, AGED 38 YEARS
	S/O.JOHN, KAITHAMALA HOUSE, KARAKURISSY P.O., PALAKKAD.
28	P.K.MANIKANDAN, AGED 43 YEARS
	W/O.KOCHU, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, ELANAD P.O., AALICHODU, THRISSUR.

¶36

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶37

¶38

29 ANNE JOHNSON, AGED 54 YEARS W/O.JOHNSON, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANNUR WEST, KODUKKUNNU P.O., PALAKKAD. 30 BADHUSHA, AGED 40 YEARS W/O.SIDMUHAMMED, NADUPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMPURAM, MANNUR, PALAKKAD. 31 O.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 44 YEARS S/O.ARUMUGHAN, OLIPPARA HOUSE, SREEKRISHNAPURAM, PALAKKAD. 32 SHAMAN.P., AGED 32 YEARS D/O.IBRAHIM, THOUFEEQUE MANZIL, NAGARIPPADAM, MANNUR P.O., PALAKKAD. 33 MYMOONA, AGED 64 YEARS W/O.ABOOBACKER, NEYYAM VEEDU, POOTHANNUR, MUNDOOR P.O., PALAKKAD. 34 ALEEMA, AGED 52 YEARS W/O.SULAIMAN, NEYYAMBADAM, MUNDOOR AMSOM, PALAKKAD. BY ADVS. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR SRI.S.K.ADHITHYAN SRI.SABU PULLAN SRI.GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN

¶39

RESPONDENT/S:

¶40

*1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI- 682031. 2 THE DETECTIVE INSPECTOR, CBCID, EOW-III, KOZHIKODE- 673001. ADDL. R3 TO R9 IMPLEADED

¶41

ADDL.3 C A RADHA AGED 75 YEARS

¶42

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶43

¶44

W/O. LATE ANANDAN, CHETHAKKAD HOUSE, EZHAKKAD, MUNDOOR P.O, PALAKKAD678592

¶45

ADDL.4 V P RAMACHANDRAN

¶46

AGED 68 YEARS S/O. RAMAN, VELLAKKAD HOUSE, EZHAKKAD, MUNDOOR P.O, PALAKKAD- 678592

¶47

ADDL.5 KHADEEJA

¶48

AGED 44 YEARS W/O. KAREEM, MUNDUPARAMBU, POOTHANNUR AMSOM, PALAKKAD- 678592

¶49

ADDL.6 A S PRAVEEN

¶50

AGED 39 YEARS S/O. SOMANATHAN, ALAYATHODI HOUSE, MANNUR P.O, PALAKKAD- 678642

¶51

ADDL.7 K B SAJEESH AGED 40 YEARS S/O. BHASKARAN, KALLINGAL VEEDU, THENOOR P.O, PARALI, PALAKKAD- 678612

¶52

ADDL.8 SUSEELA

¶53

AGED 55 YEARS D/O. RAMAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE, MANNUR WEST P.O, PALAKKAD- 678612

¶54

ADDL.9 NARAYANAN

¶55

AGED 55 YEARS S/O. RAMAN, PUTHENPURAKKAL HOUSE, MANNUR WEST P.O, PALAKKAD- 678612

¶56

ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R3 TO R9 RESPECTIVELY AS PER ORDER DATED 28.7.20 IN CRL.M.A. 2/2020 IN CRL.MC 266/2020

¶57

R1 BY ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION R3, R5-9 BY ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI

¶58

OTHER PRESENT:

¶59

SRI.C.K.SURESH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.GOKUL D.SUDHAKARAN

¶60

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶61

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶62

¶63

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶64

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C. No.266 of 2020

¶65

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶66

Dated this the 18^th day of September, 2020

¶67

O R D E R

¶68

The prayer in the above Criminal Miscellaneous case filed under

¶69

Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. is as follows :

¶70

“xxx xxx may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.53/2019 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Palakkad and render justice to the petitioners.”

¶71

Heard Dr.K.P.Satheesan, learned senior counsel instructed by Sri.Gokul D Sudhakaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners (accused Nos.1 to 34), Sri.C.K.Suresh, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for official respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.R.Sreehari, learned advocate appearing for contesting respondents 3 to 9 (defacto complainants).

¶72

The petitioners herein have been arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 34 among the 34 accused in Crime No.231/2011 of Kongad Police Station, Palakkad District for offences punishable under Secs.420, 120(b) r/w Sec.34 of the IPC and Secs. 4, 5 and 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 on the basis of the First Information Statement of CW1 (R3 herein). The investigation in this case was later transferred to the Crime Branch, CID, wherein the crime was reregistered as No.795/cr/EOW III/KTM/11.

¶73

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶74

¶75

The Police after investigation has filed the impugned AnnexureI final report/charge sheet in the said crime, which has now led to the pendency of calendar case C.C.No.53/2019 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Palakkad. The brief of the prosecution case is that during the month of 2007, the accused 2 to 5 had approached the defacto complainant and collected an amount of Rs. 5,100/- and made her to join the scheme floated by A1 company – M/s.RMP Infotec Pvt.Ltd., wherein she was promised that she will get monthly commission and no commission was paid by the accused persons. The Magistrate has now taken cognizance of the offence based on Annexure-I final report/charge sheet after condoning the delay in that regard by a speaking order.

¶76

Now, it is submitted by Dr.K.P.Satheesan, learned senior counsel instructed by Sri.Gokul D.Sudhakaran, learned counsel appearing for petitioners (accused Nos. 1 to 34) as well as Sri.R.Sreehari, learned advocate appearing for contesting respondents 3 to 9 that the disputes between the parties which are purely monetary and financial in nature have been fully settled to the best satisfaction of the contesting respondents 3 to 9 and that contesting respondents 3 to 9 have no further grievances as against the petitioners/accused and that contesting respondents have no objection whatsoever, in this Court quashing the impugned criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement between the parties. It is further stated by the abovesaid advocates on both sides that the contesting

¶77

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶78

¶79

respondents 3 to 9 have separately filed affidavits as per Annexures-R5(a) to R5(g) stating the abovesaid facts and that the matter has been settled between the parties and that the contesting respondents have no objection in quashing the impugned Annexure-1 Crime report/charge sheet which led to the pendency of calendar case C.C.No.53/2019 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Palakkad.

¶80

In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of the 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. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr . reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

¶81

Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that the

¶82

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶83

¶84

impugned Annexure-I final report/charge sheet arising out of Crime No.231/2011 of Kongad Police Station, which has later been re-registered by the Crime Branch CID as Crime No.795/cr/EOW-III/KTM/11, which has now led to the pendency of calendar case C.C.No.53/2019 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad in which petitioners have been arrayed therein as the accused persons and all further proceedings emanating therefrom as against the petitioners /accused will stand quashed and set aside.

¶85

The petitioners will produce certified copies of this order before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad as well as before the investigating officer concerned for necessary information.

¶86

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous case will stand finally disposed of.

¶87

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

¶88

SKS

¶89

Crl.MC.No.266 OF 2020(C)

¶90

¶91

APPENDIX

¶92

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶93

ANNEXURE I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.06.2018 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, PALAKKAD IN C.C.NO.53/2019 AS FINAL REPORT NO.21/2018.

¶94

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶95

ANNEXURE R5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE ADDITIONAL 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 1.8.2011

¶96

ANNEXURE R5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE ADDITIONAL 4TH RESPONDNET DATED 9.1.2015 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE BIRTHS AND DEATHS, MUNDUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD.

¶97

ANNEXURE R5(C) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE ADDITIONAL 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 19.3.2020

¶98

ANNEXURE R5(D) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE ADDITIONAL 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 18.3.2020

¶99

ANNEXURE R5(E) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE ADDITIONAL 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 21.3.2020

¶100

ANNEXURE R5(F) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE ADDITIONAL 8TH RESPONDENT DATED 17.3.2020

¶101

ANNEXURE R5(G) TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE ADDITIONAL 9TH RESPONDENT DATED 17.3.2020

Rmp Infotec Pvt.Ltd. Company, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rmp Infotec Pvt.Ltd. Company, 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

Kamarudheen P. Vs the State of Kerala

P.P.Tony Vs Bindhu

Fort-in Ifra Developers Private Limited Vs Mr.Harikumar

Mrs.Aswathi Vs State of Kerala

Xavier .K.J Vs State of Kerala

Pavan Quarry and Aggregates Pvt. Ltd. Vs Anjali Vijayan