Sherin Varghese v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/21ST MAGHA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 679 of 2015 () -------------------------- IN CP 53/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I, CHANGANASSERRY PETITIONER(S)/9THE ACCUSED:
---------------------------------------------------- SHERIN VARGHESE AGED 19 YEARS S/O.T.K.VARGHESE, EDEN GARDEN, PERUNNA DISTRICT CHANGANASSERRY.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2. DEVUMON SASHI MANDIRAM, PUZHAVATHU, NEAR ELAMKUNU CHURCH CHANAGANASSERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM.
3. RAHUL SASHI MANDIRAM, PUZHAVATHU, NEAR ELAMKUNU CHURCH CHANAGANASSERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM.
4. VISHNUMON SASHI MANDIRAM, PUZHAVATHU, NEAR ELAMKUNU CHURCH CHANAGANASSERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM.
5. RANJU KURUTHIKKALAM HOUSE, VAZHAPPALLY EAST VILLAGE VAZHAPPALLY EAST KARA-686 001.
6. SHARATH MANJIPPUZHA HOUSE, NEAR SNDP BHAGOM, PUZHAVATHU KARA CHANAGANASSERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM.
7. RATHEESH M.K.
MUNDAKATHU HOUSE, MOOLAYIL, PUDUVEL PANACHICKAVU, CHANAGANASSERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM
8. SHANU MOHAN KOTTARACHIRA HOUSE, PUZHAVATHU KARA CHANAGANASSERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM R2 -R 8 BY ADV. SRI.K.ASHIS R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-022015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 679 of 2015 () -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNEXURE-A. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25/10/2014 ISSUED FROM THE ARMY RECRUITING OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM.
ANNEXURE-B. CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 4/5/2012 IN CC NO.244/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE JFCMC-III, KOTTAYAM. ANNEXURE-C. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPSONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT.
ANNEXURE-D. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPSONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT.
ANNEXURE-E. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 4TH RESPSONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT.
ANNEXURE-F. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 5TH RESPSONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT.
ANNEXURE-G. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 6TH RESPSONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT.
ANNEXURE-H. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 7TH RESPSONDENT/CW.6 ANNEXUREI. AFFIDAVIT DATED 19/1/2015 SWORN BY THE 8TH RESPSONDENT/CW.7 ANNEXURE-J. COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20/12/2014 ISSUED FROM THE ARMY RECRUITING OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE sab
P.UBAID, J.
------------------------- Crl. M.C No.679 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2015.
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the 9th accused in C.P No.53 of 2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I, Changanasserry. He seeks orders quashing the prosecution as against him on the ground of amicable settlement between him and the de facto complainant. The offences involved are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 447, 294(b), 308, 324 and 323 of IPC. The said crime was registered on the complaint of one Devumon who is the second respondent herein. The respondents 3 to 8 are the other persons who sustained injuries in the alleged incident. All the injured persons have come to terms with the 9th accused now. They have filed affidavit to the effect that they have settled the dispute with the 9th accused, and they have no grievance or complaint as against him.
On a perusal of the final report I find that there is no definite allegation against the 9th accused. I am well satisfied that orders in favour of the 9th accused quashing the prosecution will not in any manner affect the prosecution against the other accused, when it proceeds.
Crl. M.C No.679 of 2015 under Section 308 IPC are there in the prosecution records will be decided by the trial court during trial. In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in the case of non compoundable offences the High court can quash prosecution, if the parties have come to terms amicably. It is also settled that quashing prosecution in part is possible, if the complainant has come to terms with one or the other accused. However the court will have to examine whether such order will adversely affect the prosecution against the others. Here I find that orders in favour of the petitioner herein will not adversely affect the prosecution against the other accused. I am inclined to accept the settlement between the injured persons and the petitioner.
In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioner herein alone in C.P No.53 of 2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Changanasserry will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, he will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by him will stand discharged. The learned Magistrate will take necessary steps to commit the case as against the others to the court of Session. P.UBAID, JUDGE sab