Biju Mathew @ Panil Biju v. Kerala State
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. 7187 of 2014 () --------------------------- AGAINST CC 346/2012 of J.M.F.C., ADOOR CRIME NO. 1553/2014 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTITTA PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
-------------------------------- BIJU MATHEW @ PANIL BIJU AGED 37 YEARS S/O.P A MATHAI, R/A.CHENGANNURVILAYIL VEEDU KULANADA P O, PIN-698503 BY ADVS.SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) SRI.P.Y.AHAMMED PHYSI RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:
------------------------------------
1. KERALA STATE REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA
2. CHERIYAN JOHN @ BINU, AGED 39 YEARS S/O.CHERIYAN JOHN, R/A.MANGATTU PUTHEN BUNGALOW KOZUVALLOOR P O, PIN-689521
3. AJI SAMUEL, AGED 38 YEARS MANGATTU KIZHAKKEKKARA, KOZUVALLOOR PO, MULAKKUZHA PIN-689521
4. VARGHESE PHILIP, AGED 49 YEARS S/O.PHILIP, R/A.PRAYA PADICKAL, KOZUVALLOOR P O MULAKKUZHA-689521 R2 -R 4 BY ADV. SMT.PRINCY XAVIER R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.P.MAYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7187 of 2014 () --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------ ANNEXURE 1:-CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR 1553/2014 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION PENDING BEFORE JFCM COURT ADOOR DTD 11/11/2014 ANNEXURE 2:-COPY OF THE ORDER OF JFMC ADOOR IN C 346/2012 ANNEXURE 3:-COPY OF THE ORDER OF JFMC ADOOR IN CRIME NO 2124/2013 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION ANNEXURE 4:-COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRMC 1039/2011 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT ANNEXURE 5:-ORIGINAL OF THE COMPROMISE AGREEMENT DTD 11/12/2014 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------ /TRUE COPY/ P.S TO JUDGE
P.UBAID, J.
~~~~~~~~~~ Crl.M.C No.7187 of 2014 ~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 10th February, 2015
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the first accused in Crime No.1553 of 2014 of the Pandalam Police Station, registered under Section 394 of Indian Penal Code. He seeks orders quashing the F.I.R and further proceedings on the ground of settlement. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is involved as accused in eleven other crimes including a KAAPA proceeding. It is submitted that the petitioner is a person habitually involving in offences of similar nature. Of course, it is true that prosecution can be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure even in the case of noncompoundable offences; be it at the crime stage or at the trial stage. Here, investigation is going on in the crime. If the prosecution against the petitioner is now quashed, that will convey a wrong and negative message to the society. Just because he has some how come to terms with the complainant, the prosecution cannot be quashed. It is
Crl.M.C No.7187 of 2014 reported that the petitioner is a person habitually involving in offences like robbery, theft etc. If this Court grants the prayer and quashes the prosecution, it will give confidence to him to commit such offences. When investigation is in progress, the request to quash the prosecution cannot be considered. Let the investigation proceed, and let the final report come. If he is aggrieved by the final report, on any factual or legal ground, he can bring appropriate proceeding. In the present circumstances, I feel it inappropriate to quash the prosecution.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is dismissed.
Sd/- P.UBAID JUDGE ma /True copy P.S to Judge