Crl. M.C. No. 550 of 2017. Case: Babu A. and Ors. Vs State of Kerala and Ors.. High Court of Kerala (India)

Case NumberCrl. M.C. No. 550 of 2017
CounselFor Appellant: Mohanan V.T.K., Adv. and For Respondents: M.K. Pushpalatha, Public Prosecutor
JudgesRaja Vijayaraghavan V., J.
IssueCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 482; Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 308, 323, 324, 341
Judgement DateFebruary 01, 2017
CourtHigh Court of Kerala (India)


Raja Vijayaraghavan V., J.

  1. This petition is filed under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') with a prayer to invoke the extraordinary inherent powers and to quash the pending criminal proceedings.

  2. On the basis of an FIR lodged by the 2nd respondent, Crime No. 353 of 2015 of the Vatakara Police Station was registered and investigation was taken up for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the IPC, and on its completion final report has been laid before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The case was committed to the Court of Session and the same is pending as S.C. No. 1053 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court (For the Trial of cases relating to Atrocities and Sexual Violence Towards Woman and Children), Kozhikode.

  3. The prosecution allegation is that on 9.4.2015 at about 3.30 pm, the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained respondent 2 to 5 and thereafter assaulted them causing bodily injuries.

  4. The proceedings are sought to be quashed on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties. The learned counsel appearing for the parties submits that in view of the resolution of the disputes, the proceedings before the criminal court is a futile exercise. Much reliance is placed on the affidavits sworn to by the respondents 2 to 5, to buttress their submissions.

  5. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions expresses his reservations in the matter. However it is submitted that the petitioners are not persons with criminal antecedents.

  6. I have considered the submissions.

  7. The position with regard to quashing of proceedings on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties is by now well settled. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. It was observed as follows:

    61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT