IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1941 [CASE NUMBER] IN CP NO.25/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VADAKARA CRIME NO. 1551/2017 OF Vatagara Police Station, Kozhikode PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 MUJEEB RAHMAN, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. SOOPY, THEKKE VALAPPIL HOUSE, THAROPPOYIL P.O, KOZHIKODE DT., PIN 673 541. 2 SIDHEEQ, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. MOIDU HAJI, MEETHALE ERATH HOUSE, THAROPPOYIL P.O, KOZHIKODE DT 673 541. 3 ABDULLA, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. SOOPY HAJI, THAZE ERATH HOUSE, THAROPPOYIL P.O, KOZHIKODE DT 673 541. BY ADV. SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, (SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE) VADAKARA POLICE STATION) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, EERNAKULAM 31. 2 JISHNU @ KUTTU, S/O. SREEDHARAN, PAZHAMPALLY HOUSE, KOTTAPALLY P.O, KOZHIKODE DT 673 542. 3 ARJUN, S/O. BABU, PARACHALIL MEETHAL HOUSE, KOTTAPALLY P.O, KOZHIKODE DT 673 542. BY ADV. SMT.T.RASINI AJITH MURALI-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: [CASE NUMBER] 2 ORDER
This petition is filed under [SECTION] of the [ACT]
2. The petitioners herein are the accused in [CASE NUMBER] on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vadakara. In the aforesaid case, they are being proceeded against for having committed offences punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION]/[SECTION] of the [ACT].
3. On 18.11.2017 at about 10.00 p.m., the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention, wrongfully restrained respondents 2 and 3 and attacked them causing injuries.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the party respondents and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the victims and the offenders have arrived at a compromise and narrating the said fact, the victims have filed affidavits before this Court. According to the learned counsel, the records would reveal that no serious injuries were sustained by the victims. The termination of proceedings would resolve a festering private dispute between the parties and it is prayed that the proceedings be quashed. The learned counsel appearing for the party respondents would also refer to the affidavits and it is submitted that the parties have not only buried the hatchet, but also have decided to live peacefully in future. According to the learned counsel, no purpose would be served in dragging these proceedings.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners are not persons with criminal antecedents and that the State has no grievance in quashing the proceedings as no public interest is involved.
7. It is thus borne out from the submissions made at the bar that the parties have amicably settled their disputes on their own free will and without any kind of pressure, influence or coercion. The compromise, it is felt, is voluntary and genuine, and can be acted upon.
8. In [PRECEDENT], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victims and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in [PRECEDENT] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].
9. Having considered the submissions advanced and on perusing the records, it appears that the offences are entirely personal in nature and do not affect public peace or tranquility. The injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It is also felt that quashing of proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace. In a case such as the instant one, even if the prosecution is allowed to continue, it would not serve any purpose as the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It can only result in putting the victims and the accused to unwanted oppression and prejudice. Settlement will augur well for the interest of the community and will enable the parties to live in peace and harmony.
In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1 final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as [CASE NUMBER] on the file of the Judicial First Magistrate Court, Vadakara are quashed.
[ENTITY], JUDGE Avs TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN [CASE NUMBER] OF VADAAKARA POLICE STATION . ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31-01-2019 ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31-01-2019