Sasi a Vs State of Kerala

¶1

2025:KER:21480

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶6

CRL.MC NO. 940 OF 2025

¶7

CRIME NO.1358/2021 OF KARAMANA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶8

IN CC NO.96 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,

¶9

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶10

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶11

1 ARUN S J AGED 35 YEARS

¶12

S/O. SASI A., RESIDING IN SOPANAM, K G 188-A,
KALPAKA GARDENS, PAPPANAMCODE, NEMOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695018

¶13

2VARUN RAJARANGAN
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O RAJARANGAN JANARDHANAN BHASKARAN,
RESIDING IN IN SOPANAM, K G 188-A,
KALPAKA GARDENS, PAPPANAMCODE, NEMOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695018

¶14

BY ADV PRAMOD J.DEV

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

¶16

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

¶17

2AKHILA
AGED 36 YEARS
D/O SASIKALA, RESIDING IN KGRA 158 E,
KALPAKA GARDENS, PAPPANAMCODE, NEMOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695018

¶18

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶19

2025:KER:21480

¶20

2 -

¶21

BY ADVS.
SRI. SANAL P. RAJ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ARUN CHANDRAN
AMRITA ARUN(K/1870/2021)

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON
11.03.2025, ALONG WITH CRL.MC.1303/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶24

2025:KER:21480

¶25

3 -

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶29

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶30

CRL.MC NO. 1303 OF 2024

¶31

CRIME NO.1358/2021 OF KARAMANA POLICE STATION,

¶32

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶33

IN CC NO.96 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,

¶34

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶35

PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED:

¶36

1 SASI A AGED 65 YEARS

¶37

S/O. AYYAPPAN, RESIDING IN SOPANAM, K G 188-A,
KALPAKA GARDENS, PAPPANAMCODE, NEMOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695018

¶38

BY ADV PRAMOD J.DEV

¶39

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

¶40

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

¶41

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARAMANA POLICE STATION, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 695002

¶42

3AKHILA
AGED 36 YEARS
D/O SASIKALA, RESIDING IN KGRA 158 E, KALPAKA
GARDENS, PAPPANAMCODE, NEMOM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695018

¶43

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶44

2025:KER:21480

¶45

4 -

¶46

BY ADVS.
SRI. C.N. PRABHAKARAN, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ARUN CHANDRAN
HARIMOHAN(K/000327/2018)
AMRITA ARUN(K/1870/2021)
ASWATHY S MENON(K/2316/2023)

¶47

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON
11.03.2025, ALONG WITH CRL.MC.940/2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶48

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶49

2025:KER:21480

¶50

5 -

¶51

C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶52

 Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025
---------------------------------------
Dated, this the 11th day of March, 2025

¶53

COMMON ORDER

¶54

A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in

¶55

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

¶56

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

¶57

three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian
Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303].

¶58

Similarly in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab
[(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to

¶59

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶60

2025:KER:21480

¶61

6 -

¶62

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 heinous 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:

¶63

“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 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 of realities and bereft of
the technicalities of the law.”

¶64

2.In the facts at hand, petitioners in Crl.M.C. No.
940/2025 are accused nos.1 and 2; and the petitioner in

¶65

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶66

2025:KER:21480

¶67

7 -

¶68

Crl.M.C. No. 1303/2024 is the 3rdaccused in Crime

¶69

No.1358/2021 of Karamana Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram,
now pending as C.C.No.96/2022 before the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram. As per the
final report, the offences alleged are under Sections 201,
294(b), 323, 354, 447, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioners seek quashment of entire proceedings in the
above Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement
arrived at by and between the parties.

¶70

3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in both
Crl.M.Cs, learned counsel for the defacto complainant and
the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.

¶71

4.On perusal of the statements of thedefacto complainant
and CW2 (injured), recorded by the investigating Officer, it
is clear that the issues between the petitioners, the

¶72

defacto complainant and the injured are settled in mediation
before the High Court on 05.02.2025. Therefore, the defacto
complainant has no objection in quashing the criminal
proceedings against the petitioners/accused. That apart, it
is noticed that, along with these Crl.M.Cs, an additional

¶73

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶74

2025:KER:21480

¶75

8 -

¶76

affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto complainant,
wherein she would unequivocally state that the disputes have
been amicably settled and that she does not wish to
prosecute the case, any further. The defacto complainant
would also state that she has no objection in quashing the
criminal proceedings against the petitioners. This Court has
also perused the settlement agreement executed between the
defacto complainant and the 3rd accused, wherein the
settlement is vouched and no objection to the quashing of
the instant Crl.M.Cs are reiterated. This Court, is
therefore, convinced that the settlement arrived at is
genuine and bonafide. Learned Counsel for the defacto
complainant would also endorse that the quashment sought for
can be allowed.

¶77

5.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

¶78

Gian Singh (Supra), are fully satisfied. This Court is
convinced that further proceedings against the petitioners
will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have

¶79

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶80

2025:KER:21480

¶81

9 -

¶82

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 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. This
Court also notice that offences under Sections 323, 447 and
506 are compoundable, which is all the more a reason to
accept the compromise between the parties.

¶83

In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. F.I.R., and
Final Report in Crime no.1358/2021 and all further
proceedings in C.C.No.96/2022 of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court-I, Thiruvananathapuram, as against the
petitioners in both Crl.M.Cs/accused, are hereby quashed.

¶84

 Sd/-

¶85

C. JAYACHANDRAN

¶86

JUDGE

¶87

SKP

¶88

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶89

2025:KER:21480

¶90

10 -

¶91

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1303/2024

¶92

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:

¶93

`ANNEXURE A1`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO` `THE PETITIONER BY THE BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA`
`ANNEXURE A2`	`CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.` `1358 OF 2021 OF THE KARAMANA POLICE STATION` `NOW PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUDICIAL` `FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT I,` `THIRUVANANTHAPURAM`
`ANNEXURE A3`	`CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME` `NO. 1358 OF 2021 OF THE KARAMANA POLICE` `STATION NOW PENDING BEFORE THE HON’BLE` `JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT I,` `THIRUVANANTHAPURAM`
`ANNEXURE A4`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.09.2021` `IN CRL MC NO. 2061 OF 2021 OF THE HON’BLE` `SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM`
`ANNEXURE A5`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE SCENE MAHAZAR DATED` `29.08.2021 PREPARED BY THE SECOND` `RESPONDENT`
`ANNEXURE A6`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY` `THE SISTER AND HUSBAND OF THE THIRD` `RESPONDENT`

¶94

RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES:

¶95

`ANNEXURE R3(A)`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BY THE MOTHER` `OF THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT DATE 05.04.2021` `IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE` `R3(A)`
`ANNEXURE R3(B)`	`A TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 17.08.2021` `IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE` `R3(B)`
`ANNEXURE R3(C)`	`A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT` `DATED 24.08.2021 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND` `MARKED AS ANNEXURE R3(C)`

¶96

Crl.M.C.Nos.1303 of 2024 & 940 of 2025

¶97

2025:KER:21480

¶98

11 -

¶99

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 940/2025

¶100

PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES:

¶101

ANNEXURE A1

¶102

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1358
OF 2021 OF THE KARAMANA POLICE STATION
ISSUED BY THE HON’BLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE’S COURT I, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶103

ANNEXURE A2

¶104

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO. 1358 OF 2021 OF THE KARAMANA POLICE
STATION ISSUED BY THE HON’BLE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT I,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶105

ANNEXURE A3

¶106

A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.09.2021
IN CRL MC NO. 2061 OF 2021 OF THE HON’BLE
SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶107

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL

¶108

TRUE COPY

¶109

P.A. TO JUDGE

Sasi a v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasi a 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

Harkish Sreethu Vs State of Kerala

Anees.K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Sadikk Vs State of Kerala

Gopakumar Vs State of Kerala

Saajid Vs State of Kerala

Arshad C.P. Vs State of Kerala