The High Court of Kerala qua Crl.M.C. No.9419/2022 quashed the criminal proceedings under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 427, 447 and 506 IPC, relying on a settlement between parties and a final report, invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. to ensure ends of justice.
Crl.M.C. allowed; Annexure A Final Report in C.C.No.262/2020 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.
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 13TH POUSHA, 1944
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
AGAINST CC 262/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -V,
TVM (SPECIAL COURT-MARKLIST CASES)
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1JACOB @ SABU, AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. LUKE LOUIS,
KUSUMALAYAM HOUSE, NEAR L.P SCHOOL VALIYAVELI,
POUNDUKADAVU WARD, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695581
2ANU MICHAEL, AGED 27 YEARS
S/O. MICHAEL,
ATTUKAL HOUSE, T.C.81/743, VALIYAVELI,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD,
ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695581
3JOHN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. JOY,
THAIVILAKOM HOUSE, VALIYAVELI, T.C.81/529,
POUNDUKADAVU WARD,
ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695581
4THOMAS BERNARD, AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. BERNARD,
LILLI COTTAGE, NEAR GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL, VALIYAVELI,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695581
5MICHAEL THOMAS, AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. THOMAS,
ATTUKAL HOUSE, T.C.81/741, VALIYAVELI,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD,
ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695581
6PRAVEEN PETER, AGED 31 YEARS
S/O. PETER,
THAIVILAKOM HOUSE, NEAR VALIYAVELI CHURCH,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD,ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.PIN – 695581
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
2
7JOHN PAUL, AGED 26 YEARS
S/O. MICHAEL,
ATTUKAL HOUSE, T.C.81/743, VALIYAVELI,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD,
ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695581
8ANU, AGED 34 YEARS
S/O. ANTONY,
THAIVILAKOM HOUSE, NEAR VALIYAVELI SCHOOL,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD,
ATTIPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 695581
9SHERLY, AGED 53 YEARS
W/O. BRIJIT ANTONY,
ATTUKAL HOUSE, T.C.6/706, NEAR VALIYAVELI CHURCH,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695581
10SOFIA JOHNSON
AGED 33 YEARS
W/O. SHERLI RAICHEL,
JOSIA BHAVAN, UNIT NO.29, NEAR VALIYAVELI CHURCH,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695581
11JOSHNI JACOB
AGED 26 YEARS
D/O. MINI JOY,
KUSUMALAYAM HOUSE, NEAR CANAL, BACK OF L.P. SCHOOL,
VALIYAVELI, POWNDUKADAVU WARD, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695581
12ARUN POZHIKARA
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O. DASAN,
PUTHUVEL PURAYIDOM, T.C.81/48, POZHIKKARA,
VALIYAVELI,
POWNDUKADAVU WARD, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 695581
BY ADV SHAJIN S.HAMEED
RESPONDENTS:1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
3
2CHARBAL MEDONA
AGED 62 YEARS
D/O. JENOVA DECROOS,
MARTIN HOUSE, VALIYAVELI, POWNDUKADAVU WARD,
ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
PIN - 695581
R2 BY ADV AMJATHA D.A.
R1 BY SMT T V NEEMA -SR PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
4
O R D E R
This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash Annexure A Final
Report in C.C.No.262/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court V, Thiruvananthapuram on the ground of settlement between the parties.
the petitioners, Smt.Amjatha.D.A, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Smt.T.V.Neema, the learned Senior Public
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
5
Prosecutor.
sworn in by the respondent No.2 would show that the entire dispute
between the parties has been amicably settled and the de facto complainant has decided not to proceed with the criminal proceedings further. The learned 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.
(4) KLT 108 (SC)], Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and
Others [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] has held that the High Court by invoking S.482 of Cr.P.C can quash criminal proceedings in relation to non compoundable offence where the parties have settled
the matter between themselves notwithstanding the bar under S.320 of Cr.P.C. if it is warranted in the given facts and circumstances of
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 20226
the case or to ensure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of process of any Court.
nature. No public interest or harmony will be adversely affected by quashing the proceedings pursuant to Annexure A Final Report. The offences in question do not fall within the 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 A Final Report in C.C.No.262/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate
Court V, Thiruvananthapuram hereby stands quashed.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE
ab
CRL.MC NO. 9419 OF 2022
7
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 9419/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-ACERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO: 632/2014 OF THUMPA POLICE
STATION.
Annexure-BAFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES: NIL
3 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings based on a dispute settled between parties can be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. despite the statutory bar on compounding.
Whether the dispute is purely personal and quashing is warranted to ensure ends of justice.
Whether the accused are entitled to a quash order on the ground of settlement and final report.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabExplained¶38
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)]
Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and OthersExplained¶39
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 OthersExplained¶39
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others [(2019) 5 SCC 688] · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
State of Kerala represented by the Public Prosecutor
Jacob @ Sabu
Anu Michael
John
Thomas Bernard
Michael Thomas
Kauser Edappagath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court