Accused Nos.1 to 3 in a Crime for assault with an iron rod sought quashing of proceedings via Section 482 CrPC after settlement with the de facto complainant. Relying on Gian Singh precedent and the complainant's affidavit, the court quashed all proceedings.
All proceedings against petitioners in Crime No.2376/2016 of Pathanamthitta Police Station 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 MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 366 OF 2024
CRIME NO.2376/2016 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 :
1DEEPU CHANDRAN @ MANIKANDAN
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O RAMACHANDRAN, CHARUVIL HOUSE,
KAIPATTUR, VALLIKODU VILLAGE,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN – 689 513.
2 VISANTH, AGED 30 YEARS S/O VIKRAMAN NAIR, KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, VALLIKODE VILLAGE, KAIPATTOOR MURI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN – 689 513.3JAYESH KUMAR @ KANNAN
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O JAGANATHAKURUP, GANESH NIVAS,
PANNIYALI OMALLOOR P.O.,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN – 689 647.
BY ADV AJEESH K.SASI
RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE :
1NIKHIL, AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O LIPU, MALETHU VEEDU AZHOOR MURI,
PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE,
KOZHENCHERRY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN – 695 305.
2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031.SMT.SREELAKSHMI SABU – R1
SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 366 OF 2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
......….............................................
Crl.M.C.No.366 of 2024
…................................................
Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2024
ORDER
Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash all proceedings against them.
CRL.MC NO. 366 OF 2024
3
ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.
6. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303],
the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].
The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the de facto complainant stands by the contents thereof. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled and no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.
CRL.MC NO. 366 OF 2024
4
Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in Crime
No.2376/2016 of Pathanamthitta Police Station, are quashed.
This Crl.M.C is allowed as above.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE AMV/06/04/2024
CRL.MC NO. 366 OF 2024
5
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 366/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE-1TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.2376/2016
OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PENDING
ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRTAE-I PATHANAMTHITTA
DATED 16.7.2016.
ANNEXURE-2THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT/1STRESPONDENTHEREIN
SIGNIFYING THE FACTUM OF SETTLEMENT
COMPOSITION OF THE DISPUTES WITH THE
PETITIONERS DATED 27.12.2023.
TRUE COPY
1 issue framed by the court
Can proceedings against accuseds in Crime No.2376/2016 be quashed under Section 482 CrPC given the settlement affirmed by the de facto complainant?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and AnotherRelied on¶6
[(2012) 10 SCC 303] · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and AnotherReferred¶6
[(2014) 6 SCC 466] · Who else cites this
Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and AnotherReferred¶6
[(2014) 9 SCC 653] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Deepu Chandran @ Manikandan
Visanth
Jayesh Kumar @ Kannan
Nikhil
State of Kerala
Bechu Kurian Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court