The petitioner herein is the original 4th accused in S.C No.191/2012 of the Court of Session, Perumbavoor. Crime in the said case was registered by the police under Sections 397 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, on the complaint of one Sijo. The offence practically involved in the crime is the offence of dacoity committed by using deadly weapon, and by inflicting some injuries on the victims. Thus the definite substantive offence comes under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. But the police submitted final report under Sections 427 and 397 of IPC. The other accused faced trial before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Perumbavoor in S.C No.191/2012 and obtained a judgment of acquittal on 30.6.2014 when all the material witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution in view of an amicable settled made by the parties out of court. The case against the petitioner herein was split up and refiled, and it now stands transferred to the register of long pending cases as L.P No.8/2013. The petitioner now seek orders quashing the prosecution as against him on the ground that continuance of prosecution against him in such a situation will not serve any purpose.
2. This is a case where some direction to the police is necessary. It appears that the police does not know what Section 397 IPC is. The said section only provides the minimum sentence in certain circumstances of commission of offence of robbery or dacoity, where some deadly weapon is used, or an attempt is made on the life of the victim, or some grievous hurt is attempted or caused to any person in the transaction, by the accused. No doubt, the substantive offence must always be robbery or dacoity. When a person commits the offence of robbery or dacoity by using a deadly weapon, or if he causes any grievous hurt to the victim or other person in the process of robbery or dacoity, or attempts to cause death or grievous hurt to the victim or other person in the process, the law under Section 397 of IPC provides that the imprisonment with which such offender shall be punished shall not be less than seven years. Thus it is quite clear that Section 397 of IPC does not make any substantive offence. In this case, instead of bringing the charge under Section 395 IPC, r/w 397 IPC the police, out of ignorance, omitted Section 395 IPC and simply brought a charge under Section 397 of the IPC. This requires serious consideration by the whole police department in the State. I have come across many such instances of final report submitted by the police simply under Section 397 IPC without bringing specific charge for the substantive offence of robbery or dacoity. The Director General of Prosecution will obtain a copy of this judgment, and forward copies to the District Police Chief of all the Districts with instruction to give necessary direction to all police stations in the State.
3. Annexure 2 judgment shows that the other accused obtained a judgment of acquittal when all the material witnesses including the victims turned fully hostile to the prosecution. The defacto complainant Sijo and the other person who sustained injuries in the alleged incident are respondents 2 to 5 in this proceeding. They have filed affidavit to the effect that they have settled the whole dispute with the accused, and that they have no complaint or grievance now. I am well satisfied that there is a real and genuine settlement between the parties, and continuance of prosecution as against the petitioner herein in the above circumstance will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, the prosecution cannot in any manner improve the case as against the petitioner herein, and the witnesses also will not, in any manner, support the prosecution when the case against the petitioners goes to trial.
In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioner herein in Crime No.600/2011 of the Kalady Police Station, which is now pending consideration before the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Perumbavoor, will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioner will stand released from prosecution.
P.UBAID JUDGE ab