Petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings based on settlement. The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and Final Report, citing that the personal nature of the dispute and amicable settlement prevented abuse of process.
Crl.M.C. allowed; Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.473/2011 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 DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1944
CRL.MC NO. 1904 OF 2022
CC 239/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,
KOLLAM
Crime No.473/2011 of Anchalumoodu Police Station, Kollam
PETITIONERS:
1 THOMAS @UNNI AGED 40 YEARS VALIYAVILA VEEDU, CHERMOODU CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690505 2 VICTOR AGED 65 YEARS VALIYAVILA VEEDU, CHERMOODU CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690505 3 AJITH AGED 40 YEARS DEVAKI MANDIRAM, CHERUMOODU CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690505 4 RAKNAKUMAR AGED 46 YEARS THAYYIL VEEDU, CHERUMOODU CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 690505. BY ADV B.SIBI
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031.
Crl.M.C.No.1904 of 2022
..2..
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ANCHALUMMOODU POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 691601. 3 SHEELA, AGED 53 YEARS, VIMAL BHAVAN, CHEMMAKAD CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 691601. 4 VINEETHA VINCENT, AGED 33 YEARS, VIMAL BHAVAN, CHEMMAKAD CHERI, PERINAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 691601 R1 & R2 BY SMT.T.V.NEEMA SR. Public Prosecutor THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.1904 of 2022
..3..
ORDER
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.473/2011 of Anchalumoodu Police Station on the ground of settlement between the parties.
Crl.M.C.No.1904 of 2022
..4..
Prosecutor, on instruction, submits that the matter was enquired into through the investigating officer and a statement of the de facto complainant was also recorded wherein she reported that the matter was amicably settled.
Crl.M.C.No.1904 of 2022
category of offences prohibited for compounding in terms of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Gian Singh (supra), Narinder Singh (supra) and Laxmi Narayan (supra).
For the reasons stated above, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding with the matter any further. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.473/2011 of Anchalumoodu Police Station hereby stands quashed.
Sd/-
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE
skj
Crl.M.C.No.1904 of 2022
..6..
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1904/2022
| PETITIONE | RS' AN | NEXURES |
|---|---|---|
| Annexure | A1 | CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.473/2011 OF ANCHALUMMOODU POLICE STATION, KOLLAM. |
| Annexure | A2 | CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN |
| FIR NO. 473/2011 OF ANCHALUMMOODU | ||
| POLICE STATION, KOLLAM NUMBERED AS CC | ||
| NO. 239/2013 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL | ||
| 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOLLAM. | ||
| Annexure | A3 | TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE NO. |
| 10487/2011 OF VINCENT ISSUED BY THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION |
||
| Annexure | A4 | THE AFFIDAVIT PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 28/02/2022. |
| Annexure | A5 | THE AFFIDAVIT PREPARED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 28/02/2022. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings can be quashed under S.482 Cr.P.C. despite the offences being non-compoundable if there is a settlement and no public interest is affected.
Whether the dispute being purely personal warrants quashing to ensure ends of justice.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabRelied on¶28
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)]
Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and OthersRelied on¶28
Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] · Who else cites this
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and OthersRelied on¶28
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
THOMAS @ UNNI
VICTOR
AJITH
RAKNAKUMAR
STATE OF KERALA
SHEELA
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
