Aneesh K.Ummen v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/13TH MAGHA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 505 of 2015 () -------------------------- IN CP 43/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I, PUNALUR CRIME NO. 1641/2013 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ANEESH K.UMMEN AGED 20 YEARS S/O KOCHUMMEN, KOCHUVILA VEEDU, AYOOR EDAMULAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
2. SHAMNAD AGED 19 YEARS S/O VAHID, S.S.MANZIL, KARALIKONAM ELAMADU MURI, ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
3. ABIN VARGHESE AGED 19 YEARS S/O GHEEVARGHESE, PARAYADI VEEDU, MANNOOR MURI KOTTUKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
4. MUHAMMED SHAN AGED 19 YEARS S/O HABEEBULLA, BISMILLA MANZIL, PERUVANTHODU AKKAL MURI, ELAMADU VILLAG, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
5. CHANDU BOBAN AGED 19 YEARS S/O BOBAN, MURUKAN HOUSE, VAYYANAM MURI ITTIVA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU SMT.S.SEETHA RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDNETS/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ANCHAL POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
2. ANAND S.BABU, AGED 19 YEARS S/O SURESH BABU, ANAND BHAVAN, THAZHAMEL MURI ANCHAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691306.
3. GIREESH, AGED 19 YEARS S/O DINESH, THACHUMANDIRAM, ALUMMOODU NEAR MOSQUE, EROOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691312. R2 & 3 BY ADV. SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-022015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 505 of 2015 () -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNEXURE 1: TRUE COPY OF FIR WITH FIS IN CRIME NO.1641/2013 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 2: THE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1641/2013 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 3: THE COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATE OF 2ND RESPONDNET DATED 26.9.2013.
ANNEXURE 4: THE COPY OF WOUND CERTIFICATES OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 26.9.2013.
ANNEXURE 5: THE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2NDE RESPONDENT REGARDING THE COMPROMISE DATED 9.10.2014.
ANNEXURE 6: THE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT REGARDING THE COMPROMISE DATED 9.10.2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE sab
P.UBAID, J.
----------------------------- Crl. M.C No. 505 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2015.
O R D E R
The petitioners herein are the 5 accused in C.P No.43/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Punalur. They seek orders quashing the prosecution on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between them and the de facto complainant. Crime in this case was registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 294(b), 308 r/w 149 IPC, on the complaint of one Anand who is the second respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He has filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the whole dispute with the accused and he has no grievance or complaint now. The other person who sustained injuries in the alleged incident is the respondent No.3 in this proceeding. He has also filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the whole dispute with the accused, and he has no grievance or complaint now.
2.
In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution in pending proceedings, if the parties have really settled the whole dispute amicably out of court,
Crl. M.C No. 505 of 2015 and continuance of the proceedings will not serve any purpose in such a circumstance of amicable settlement. Here, I find a real and genuine case of settlement between the parties. On a perusal of the case records I find that Section 308 IPC was in fact incorporated by the police purely on the basis of some hypothetical statement. The respondents 2 and 3 had not sustained any visible injury in the alleged incident. Anyway, the whole dispute now stands settled. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose, other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will support the prosecution in such a situation, if the case goes to trial.
In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners herein in C.P No.43/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Punalur will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged.
P.UBAID, JUDGE sab