In a criminal miscellaneous case, the petitioner sought to quash proceedings based on a settlement under Section 482 CrPC. The Single Judge rejected the prayer, citing the accused's criminal antecedents and the need to consider the conduct of the accused.
Prayer for quashing of criminal proceedings dismissed.
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 RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 1008 OF 2023
INCP24/2021OFJUDICIALMAGISTRATEOFFIRSTCLASS-III,KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
BHUSHARJAMHAR
AGED29YEARS
S/OABBASE.M,RESIDINGATCHERIKUNNUMMALHOUSE,
PAINGOTTUPPURAM,PERINGOLAM.PO,KOZHIKODETALUK,
KERALA,PIN-686582.
BYADVT.H.ARAVIND
RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1STATEOFKERALA
REPRESENTEDBYPUBLICPROSECUTOR,
HIGHCOURTOFKERALA,PIN-682031.
2THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER
KASABAPOLICESTATION,KOZHIKODEDISTRICT,
PIN-673001.
3NOOHP.P
AGED35YEARS
S/OSAINUDHEEN,RESIDINGATPATTUPURATHHOUSE,
NAIIAIAM.PO,PIN-673027,KOZHIKODEDISTRICT,
KERAIA,
SRI.MPPRASHANTH,PP
THISCRIMINALMISC.CASEHAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
12.06.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYPASSEDTHEFOLLOWING:
CRL.MCNO.1008OF2023
2
ORDER
This petition is filed invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity).
the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-III, Kozhikode. In the aforesaid case, he is accused of having committed offenses punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 308 of the IPC.
CRL.MCNO.1008OF2023
3
Court in State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan,1 has laid down the principles and had observed that quashing of proceedings based on settlement would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. He would point out that the Apex Court had observed that while quashing the proceedings, the court will have to consider whether the crime is against the society or an individual alone and also the character, conduct, and antecedents of the accused. He would point out that the accused is involved in as many as five crimes, viz., Crime Nos.483/2012 of the Kasaba Police Station, Crime No.518/2012 of the Kunnamangalam Police Station, Crime No.74/2014, 141/2016, 145/2016, 497/2017 and 1037/2014, 233/2022, 142/2023, 1470/2020 of the Nadakkavu Police Station, Crime No.945/2021 of the Medical College Police Station, Crime Nos.80/2018, 510/2019 of the Kasaba Police Station, Crime No.846/2020 of the Vellayil Police Station, Crime No.42/2020 of the Town Police Station and Crime No.110/2020 of the Koyilandi Police Station.
records.
Supreme Court has summarised the law as laid down in Gian Singh v. State
of Punjab2 , Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab3 , State of Rajasthan v.
1 (2019) 5 SCC 688
2 (2012) 10 SCC 303
3 2014 (6) SCC 466
CRL.MCNO.1008OF2023
4
Shambhu Kewat4 , State of M.P. v. Deepak5 , State of M.P. v. Manish6 ,
J. Ramesh Kamath v. Mohana Kurup7 ; State of M.P. v. Rajveer Singh8 , Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat9 , State of M.P. v. Kalyan Singh10
and State of M.P. v. Dhruv Gurjar11 . It was laid down as under:
4 (2014) 4 SCC 149
5 (2014) 10 SCC 285
6 (2015) 8 SCC 307
7 2016) 12 SCC 179
8 (2016) 12 SCC 471
9 (2017) 9 SCC 641
10 (2019) 4 SCC 268
11 (2019) 5 SCC 570]
CRL.MCNO.1008OF2023
5
to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;
15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offenses, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise, etc.
6
CRL.MCNO.1008OF2023
under Section 482 of the Code to put a premature end to the prosecution.
This petition is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE
Sru
CRL.MCNO.1008OF2023
7
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1008/2023
PETITIONERANNEXURES
AnnexureA1COPYOFTHEFIRNO113/2021DATED04.03.2021
OFKASABAPOLICESTATION,KOZHIKODE.
AnnexureA2THECOPYOFTHEFINALREPORTDATED
04.08.2021.
AnnexureA3ANAFFIDAVITSWORNBYTHE3RDRESPONDENT
DATED08.07.2022.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings should be quashed based on a settlement given the accused's antecedents and the nature of the offence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
BHUSHARJAM HAR
STATE OF KERALA
NOOHP P
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court