← Library
High Court of KeralaCrl.MC/5586/2015disposed of

Jayamohan M. v. The State Of Kerala

2015-08-20Honourable Mr. Justice Alexander Thomas5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/29TH SRAVANA, 1937 Crl.MC.No. 5586 of 2015 () --------------------------- FIR NO. 304/2015 OF MANNANTHALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -------------------- PETITIONERS/1 TO 3 ACCUSED :

------------------------------------------------

1. JAYAMOHAN M., S/O.M.MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 49 YEARS, JAI VIHAR THUNDATHIL P.O., KARYAVATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. T.S.SAJI KUMAR S/O.G.THANKAPPAN NAIR, AGED 41 YEARS, MEERA BHAVAN BSNRA - 91, MALAMEL NADA, MUKKOLA P.O.

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3. A.S.HARIKUMAR S/O.ANANTHAN PILLAI, NIKUNJAM KUTTIAYANI PANTHALACODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADV. SRI.V.VINAR RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

---------------------------------------------------------------

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-628 031.

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANNANTHALA POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA PINCODE - 695 001.

3. SADASIVAN K.K., S/O.KUNJU KUNJU, AGED 49 YEARS RESIDING AT CHARUVILAKATHU VEEDU BURMA ROAD, KUMARAPURAM, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN R3 BY ADV. SRI. M.R.SASITH PANICKER THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-08-2015, ALONG WITH CRL.M.C NO. 5645/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

Crl.MC.No. 5586 of 2015 () ------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

------------------------------------------- ANNEXURE-A1:

TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.304/2015 OF MANNANTHALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

ANNEXURE-A2:

TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

================== Crl.M.C.No.5586 of 2015 Crl.M.C.No.5645 of 2015 ================== Dated this the 20th day of August , 2015

O R D E R

The petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.5586 of 2015 are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.5586 of 2015 of Mannanthala Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram district registered for offences under Secs.341, 323, 506(ii), 34 of the IPC and Sec.3(1) x of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The de facto complainant in this case is the contesting respondent No.3, who is none other than an accused in the counter case and the petitioner in connected Crl.M.C.No.5645 of 2015. Incidentally, the first petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.5586 of 2015 is the third respondent in connected Crl.M.C.No.5645 of 2015. The petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.5645 of 2015 is the accused No.1 in Crime No.330/2015 of Mannanthala Police Station registered for offences under Secs.341, 323, 324, 506(ii), 294 (B), 34 of IPC. It is stated that the respective de facto complainants in both cases and the petitioners concerned have settled all the disputes and the de facto complainants in both these cases have also filed affidavits to that effect that they have settled the dispute with the accused and they

Crl.M.C.No.5586/2015 Crl.M.C.No.5645/2015 -:2:- have no grievance or complaint now.

2.

In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have really settled the whole dispute or if continuance of prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also found that continuance of prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court.

On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of the investigation materials on record and the affidavits of settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court in the cases as in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 = (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr. reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof, could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for quashment.

Crl.M.C.No.5586/2015 Crl.M.C.No.5645/2015 -:3:- Accordingly, both the Crl.M.Cs stand finally disposed of as follows:

i). In Crl.M.C.No.5586/2015, it is ordered that the impugned Anx.A-1 FIR filed in the impugned Crime No.304/2015 of Mannanthala Police Station and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the petitioners are quashed. ii). In Crl.M.C.No.5645/2015, it is ordered that the impugned Anx.A-1 FIR in Crime No.330/2015 Mannanthala Police Station of and all further proceedings arising therefrom pending against the petitioner is quashed.

Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE AVS