Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 1 :- 2025:KER:28267 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. 8137 OF 2024 CRIME NO.1009/2020 OF VADAKARA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.451 OF 2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VADAKARA PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 TO : 1 ASHIQ K AGED 46 YEARS S/O KUNNJAMADTH, KOKOLI HOUSE, CHEMMARATHUR P.O KERALA, PIN - 673104 2 ABDU RAHIMAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O IBRAHIM HAJI, KOKOLI HOUSE, CHEMMARATHUR P.O KERALA, PIN - 673104 3 ABDUL NASAR AGED 40 YEARS KOKOLI HOUSE, CHEMMARATHUR P.O.,KERALA, PIN - 673104 BY ADVS. SHARAN SHAHIER SNEHA JOY RHEA SHERRY AQEEL MUHAMMED K.H. Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 2 :- 2025:KER:28267 RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 PADMAVATHI W/O. BALAN, AGED 64 YEARS PUTHIYOOTTUMKADI HOUSE, CHEMMARATHUR P.O, MEENKANDI, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673104 3 BALAN S/O KELAPPAN, AGED 65 YEARS, PUTHIYOOTTUMKADI HOUSE, CHEMMARATHUR P.O, MEENKANDI, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE,KERALA, PIN - 673104 4 SHYJU @ DIBEESH S/O BALAN, AGED 42, PUTHIYOOTTUMKADI HOUSE, CHEMMARATHUR P.O, MEENKANDI, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE, KERALA, PIN - 673104 BY ADVS. S.MOHAMMED FEBIN 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.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 3 :- 2025:KER:28267 O R D E R 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], 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 Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 4 :- 2025:KER:28267 the F.I.R in a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is a henious and serious offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 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 here below: “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 law.” 2. In the facts at hand, petitioners are accused nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.1009 of 2020 of Vatakara Police Station, Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 5 :- 2025:KER:28267 Kozhikode, now pending as C.C.No.451/2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Vatakara. As per the Final Report, the offences alleged are under Sections 341, 323 and 324, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners seek 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 petitioners; learned counsel for respondents 2 to 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/2nd respondent and respondents 3 and 4/injured persons, recorded over the phone, were handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioners, the defacto complainant and the injured persons Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 6 :- 2025:KER:28267 are settled out of the Court and that they are disinterested to proceed with the prosecution case against the petitioners. They would further state that they have no objection in quashing the case against the petitioners. That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, affidavits have been sworn to by the defacto complainant/2nd respondent and respondents 3 and 4/injured persons as Annexures-2, 3 and 4, wherein they would unequivocally state that the disputes have been settled amicably out of the Court and that they have no grievance against the petitioners. They would also swear that they have no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners and that the affidavits are sworn to on their own volition. Moreover, learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 would submit that the quashment sought for can be allowed in view of the settlement arrived at. This Court is therefore convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide. Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 7 :- 2025:KER:28267 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 petitioners 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 offences under Sections 341 and 323 are compoundable, which is all the more a reason to accept the compromise between the parties. 6. In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-1 Final Report, and all further proceedings in Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 8 :- 2025:KER:28267 C.C.No.451/2021 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Vatakara, are hereby quashed. Sd/- C.JAYACHANDRAN, JUDGE ww Crl.M.C.No.8137 of 2024 -: 9 :- 2025:KER:28267 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8137/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 1009/2020 OF BADAGARA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT DATED 24.09.2020 ANNEXURE 2 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30/8/2024 ANNEXURE 3 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30/8/2024 ANNEXURE 4 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30/8/2024