The High Court allowed a criminal revision petition to quash the conviction and sentence of the applicants. Relying on the doctrine of ends of justice under Section 482 CrPC, set aside the lower court judgments after genuine settlement was reached between parties.
Conviction and sentence set aside; further proceedings quashed; bail bonds cancelled.
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 C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1945
CRL.REV.PET NO. 987 OF 2011
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRA 760/2004 OF THE COURT OF SESSION,
THALASSERY
CC 314/2002 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,THALASSERY
REVISION PETITIONER/S:
1 UMESH ,AGED 28 YEARS, THIRUVANGADI AMSOM DESOM, THALASSERY,, KANNUR DISTRICT.2 SANDEEP AGED 27 YEARS , S/O. MANOHARAN KOTTIATH HOUSE, THIRUVANGAD AMSOM DESOM,, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT.3 RAJESH , AGED 25 YEARS S/O.DAMODARAN, KUNIYIL HOUSE,, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT.4JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 25 YEARS
S/O. PREMANAD, SREELA BHAVAN, CHIRAKKARA,, THALASSERY,
KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.V.ASOKAN
SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA (SHO, THALASSERY POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM.2 (ADDL. R2) REJILS/O HARI, PRAVEEN HOUSE, THIRUVANGAD AMSOM, CHIRAKKARA
DESOM, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. ( IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 02.11.23 IN CRLMA 1/2023)
3(ADDL R3) A. SANIL KUMAR
S/O VIJAYAN, ALAKKADAN HOUSE, KAVUMBHAGAM, CHIRAKKARA,
THIRUVANGAD AMSOM, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT.
(IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 02.11.23 IN CRLMA 1/2023)
BY ADV K.RAJESH SUKUMARAN -R2 & R3
Smt Seetha S, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- R1
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:2
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
C.S DIAS,J.
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
----------------------------Dated this the 8th day of November, 2023
ORDER
The revision petition is filed challenging the
legality and correctness of the judgment in Crl.A No.760/2004 of the Court of Session, Thalassery (Appellate Court), confirming the judgment in CC No.314/2002 of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Thalassery, (Trial Court) holding the revision petitioners guilty and convicting them for the offences under Secs.143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 read with Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short,
IPC) and sentencing them to imprisonment for different
3
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
terms with highest term for a period of 18 months for the offence under Sec.324 of the IPC. The sentences
were ordered to run concurrently.
Prosecution case in brief
4
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
against them in the questioning under Section 313 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure ( in short, Code).
Trial Court Judgment
run concurrently.
5
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
Appellate Court judgment
materials placed on record, by the impugned judgment, confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal.
the concurrent judgments of the courts below, the revision petition is filed.
3/the injured.
6
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
compounding the offences.
7
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Joshi v. State of
Haryana [2003 (2) KLT 1062]; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)]; Bitan Sen Gupta & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. [2018 KHC 7390 ] and decisions of this Court in Renjith v. State of Kerala [2019 (4) KLT SN 41 (C. No.56] has held that if the requirements of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. are satisfied, in the sense that it is necessary to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or to secure the ends of justice, criminal proceedings involving noncompoundable offences can be quashed,
notwithstanding the fact that the order of conviction has been passed against the accused provided the offence does not fall within the category of offences prohibited
8
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
to be quashed as per the guidelines laid down in Gian Singh (Supra) and the other decisions on the point.
of the case and after reading the affidavits of the respondents 2 and 3 and taking into consideration the law laid down by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the afore-cited precedents, I am inclined to invoke the plenary powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the courts below by the impugned judgments, which will augur the relationship between the parties and harmony in the society, which will in
turn meet the ends of justice.
9
Crl.R.P No.987 of 2011
In the result,
SD/-
sks/8.11.23
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can exercise its plenary powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings and set aside conviction in a non-compoundable offence where the matter is settled and
Whether the concurrence of parties to a settlement after conviction justifies setting aside the conviction and sentencing for offences under the Indian Penal Code.
If the invocation of Section 482 is necessary to secure the ends of justice despite the existence of a final conviction in this case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Soban v. State of KeralaRelied on¶60
Soban v. State of Kerala [2021 (3) KLT Online 1179]
Joshi v. State of HaryanaReferred¶63
Joshi v. State of Haryana [2003 (2) KLT 1062]
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabReferred¶63
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)]
Bitan Sen Gupta & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr.Referred¶63
Bitan Sen Gupta & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Anr. [2018 KHC 7390]
Renjith v. State of KeralaReferred¶63
Renjith v. State of Kerala [2019 (4) KLT SN 41]
2 provisions across 2 enactments
UMESH
SANDEEP
RAJESH
JAYAPRAKASH
STATE OF KERALA
REJIL
C.S. DIAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court