Vikraman Pillai Vs State of Kerala

¶1

2025:KER:22934

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶6

CRL.MC NO. 10021 OF 2023

¶7

CRIME NO.48/2021 OF Neyyattinkara Police Station,

¶8

Thiruvananthapuram

¶9

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.1265 OF 2021

¶10

OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,NEYYATTINKARA

¶11

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶12

VIKRAMAN PILLAI
AGED 65 YEARS

¶13

S/O. KUMARAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT LEKSHMI NIVAS,
VADDY THOPPU,CONVENT ROAD, BACK OF KSRTC BUST
STAND, KADAVATTARAM DESHAM, NEYYATTINKARA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695121

¶14

BY ADV S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)

¶15

RESPONDENT/STATE AND DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶16

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031

¶17

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695121

¶18

3 GAYATHRI

¶19

AGED 22 YEARS

¶20

D/O. VIJAYALEKSHMI, RESIDING AT LEKSHMI SADANAM,
VADDYTHOPPU,CONVENT ROAD, BACK OF KSRTC BUST STAND,
KADAVATTARAM DESHAM, NEYYATTINKARA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695121

¶21

SRI. C.N. PRABHAKARAN (SR.PP)

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶23

07.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

2025:KER:22934

¶25

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶26

:2:

¶27

C.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶28

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶29

Dated this the 7^th day of March, 2025

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v.
State of Punjab and Another [(2007) 4 CTC 769],
framed broad guidelines as regards quashment of the
criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code
in respect of offences which are not compoundable in
terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the
guidelines was that the offences against human body,
other than murder and culpable homicide, may be
permitted to be compounded, when the court is in a
position to record a finding that the settlement
between the parties is voluntary and fair. These
guidelines were quoted with approval by a three

¶32

2025:KER:22934

¶33

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶34

:3:

¶35

Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian
Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC
303]. Similarly in Narinder Singh and Others v.
State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has gone to the extent of sanctioning
invocation of the inherent power under section 482
of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R in
a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is
a henious and serious offence. A practical approach
is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme in Madan
Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as
regards quashment in respect of offences like 379,
406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant findings of which
are extracted herebelow:

¶36

“6.We need to emphasise that it is
perhaps advisable that in disputes where the
question involved is of a purely personal
nature, the court should ordinarily accept
the terms of the compromise even in criminal
proceedings as keeping the matter alive with
no possibility of a result in favour of the

¶37

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶38

2025:KER:22934

¶39

:4:

¶40

prosecution is a luxury which the courts,
grossly overburdened as they are, cannot
afford and that the time so saved can be
utilised in deciding more effective and
meaningful litigation. This is a common
sense approach to the matter based on ground
ofrealitiesandbereftofthe
technicalities of the law.”

¶41

2.In the facts at hand, petitioner is the sole
accused in Crime No.48 of 2021 of Neyyattinkara
Police Station, Thirvanathapuram, now pending as
C.C.No.1265/2021 before the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara. The offences
alleged are under Section 294(b) and 348 of the
Indian Penal Code. The petitioner seeks quashment of
entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on
the strength of the settlement arrived at by and
between the parties.

¶42

4 . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the defacto

¶43

2025:KER:22934

¶44

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶45

:5:

¶46

complainant/respondent no.3 and the learned Senior
Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.

¶47

5. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed
to record the statement of the defacto complainant.
The said direction was complied and the statement
was handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear
that the issues between the petitioner and the
defacto complainant are settled amicably and that
the instant Crl.M.C was filed with the knowledge and
consent of the defacto complainant, wherefore, she
has no objection in quashing the criminal
proceedings against the petitioner. That apart, it
is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an
affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto
complainant (3rd respondent herein) as Annexure-A3,
wherein she would unequivocally state that the
disputes have been settled and that the complaint
emanated from some misunderstanding. The defacto
complainant would also swear that she does not

¶48

2025:KER:22934

¶49

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶50

:6:

¶51

intend to proceed further with the prosecution case
and that she has no objection in quashing the
criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The
affidavit is sworn to on her own volition, without
any compulsion, whatsoever. This Court is therefore
convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine
and bonafide. Learned counsel for the defacto
complainant/ 3rd respondent would also endorse that
the quashment sought for can be allowed.

¶52

6. In the light of the above referred facts, this
Court is of the opinion that the necessary
parameters, as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra),
Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and Gian Singh (Supra),
are fully satisfied. This court is convinced that
further proceedings against the petitioner will be a
futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have
already been settled. There is little possibility of
any conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement
arrived at by and between the parties, if they are

¶53

2025:KER:22934

¶54

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶55

:7:

¶56

compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the
same, in the estimation of this Court, will amount
to abuse of process of Court. The quashment sought
for would secure the ends of justice.

¶57

In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed.
Annexure-A1 FIR, Annexure-A2 Final Report, and all
further proceedings in C.C.No.1265/2021 of the
JudicialFirstClassMagistrateCourt-I,

¶58

Neyyattinkara, are hereby quashed.

¶59

sd/-

¶60

C. JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE.

¶61

Raj.

¶62

2025:KER:22934

¶63

Crl.MC.No.10021 of 2023

¶64

:8:

¶65

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10021/2023

¶66

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶67

Annexure A1THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.
48/2021 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE
STATION DATED 07.01.2021

¶68

Annexure A2THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
IN C.C. NO. 1265 /2021 OF JFMC-1,
NEYYATTINKARA

¶69

Annexure A3AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 30TH OCTOBER, 2023
SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT (DE-FACTO
COMPLAINANT) BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT

Vikraman Pillai v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikraman Pillai v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hudaifa C.H, Vs State of Kerala

Sibi.v.T Vs State of Kerala

Ajmal Sha O.S Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

Eldho Alias Vs State of Kerala

Mr. Muhammed Shajil Ayyoth Vs State of Kerala