CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:25906 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 CRIME NO.1491/2023 OF Muvattupuzha Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 20.11.2024 IN CC NO.8 OF 2024 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I MUVATTUPUZHA PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SUNU THOMAS AGED 50 YEARS W/O. FR. THOMAS CHAKIRIYIL, CHAKIRIYIL HOUSE, NIRAPPU BHAGAM, PIRAVOM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686664 BY ADV BIJU ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 686661 3 SUDHA VARGHESE AGED 55 YEARS CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:25906 W/O. KUNJUMON VARGHESE, AGED 55 YEARS, PUTHEN VEEDU, ALENCHERY, YEROOR P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM, PIN - 691312 4 BABY VARGHESE @ KUNJUMON VARGHESE AGED 59 YEARS S/O. Y. BABY, PUTHEN VEEDU, ALENCHERY, YEROOR P.O., ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691312 BY ADV Shabeer Ali Mohamed SEENA.C -PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:25906 C. JAYACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------ CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 24th day of March, 2025 ORDER A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect of offences which are not compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was that the offences against human body, other than murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be compounded, when the court is in a position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with approval by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:25906 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the extent of sanctioning invocation of the inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R. in a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is a heinous and serious offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant findings of which are extracted herebelow: “6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:25906 law.” 2. In the facts at hand, petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1491/2023 of Muvattupuzha Police Station, Ernakulam, now pending as C.C.No.8/2024 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha. As per the final report the offences alleged are under Sections 323 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner seeks quashment of entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the parties. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the defacto complainant/respondent no.3 and respondent no.4 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records. 4. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to record the statement of the defacto complainant. The said direction was complied and the statements of the defacto complainant/3rd respondent and the injured/4th CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:25906 respondent recorded over the phone, were handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioner, the defacto complainant and the injured are settled amicably and that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, affidavits have been sworn to by the defacto complainants as Annexures-A3 and A4, wherein they would unequivocally state that the disputes have been settled and that they do not want to proceed further with the case against the petitioner. They would also swear that they have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner and that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. The affidavits are sworn to on their own volition, without any compulsion, whatsoever. This Court, is therefore, convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide. Learned Counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 would also endorse that the CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:25906 quashment sought for can be allowed. 5. In the light of the above referred facts, this Court is of the opinion that the necessary parameters, as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra), Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and Gian Singh (Supra), are fully satisfied. This Court is convinced that further proceedings against the petitioner will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been settled. There is little possibility of any conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement arrived at by and between the parties, if they are compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of this Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court. The quashment sought for would secure the ends of justice. This Court also notice that offence under Section 323 is compoundable, which is all the more a reason to accept the compromise between the parties. In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 8 2025:KER:25906 Annexure-A1 F.I.R., Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime No.1491/2023 and all further proceedings in C.C.No.8/2024 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha, are hereby quashed. Sd/- C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE ska CRL.MC NO. 399 OF 2025 9 2025:KER:25906 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 399/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1491 OF 2023 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION DATED 09-09-2023 Annexure A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED IN C. C. NO. 8/2024 OF HON’BLE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT I, MUVATTUPUZHA DATED 20-11-2023 Annexure A3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWEARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 08-01-2025 AFFIRMING THE ABOVE FACT Annexure A4 THE AFFIDAVIT SWEARED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 08-01-2025 AFFIRMING THE ABOVE FACT