This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the accused persons in C.C.No.217/2013 (Crime No.219/2009 of Kasaragod police station) pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod on the basis of a settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code. 2. It is alleged in the petition that a crime was registered as Crime No.219/2009 of Kasaragod police station against the petitioners on the basis of a statement given by the first respondent as defacto complainant alleging offences under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323 and 153 A read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, Annexure-A1 final report was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod and the case was taken on file as C.C.No.217/2013 and that is pending before that court. In the meantime, the matter has been settled between the parties and cordial relationship has been restored between the defacto complainant and the petitioners, who belong to different community. Since some of the offences are non compoundable in nature, they could not file application before the court below for compounding. In view of the settlement, no purpose will be served as well in continuing with the prosecution as it will amount to wastage of judicial time. So, the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this Court Seeking the following reliefs:
i. Call for the records in C.C.No.217/2013 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod and to quash Annexure A1 Final Report.
ii. And may also be pleased to pass any other order or direction deem fit and proper to the circumstances of this case and thus render justice.
3. The first respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and he has no grievance against the petitioners and now their relationship has been restored on account of the settlement which was effected due to intervention of members of both the community and harmony has been restored in the locality on account of the settlement. The counsel also submitted that the first respondent filed Annexure A3 affidavit stating these facts. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction. So prayed for allowing the application.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, as directed by this Court submitted that except this case there is no other case against the petitioners. But considering the nature of allegations and offences alleged, opposed the application for quashing the proceedings.
5. Heard both sides.
6. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the first respondent, Kasaragod police has registered a case as Crime No.219/2009 of Kasaragod police station against the petitioners alleging offences under sections 143, 147, 341, 323 and 153 A read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation Annexure A1 final report has been filed and the case was taken on file as C.C.No.217/2013 and the same is pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod. It is seen from the allegations and the averments made by the counsel for the petitioners and the first respondent that the matter has been settled between the parties due to intervention of members of both the community and on account of the settlement, harmony has been restored among the members of the two community in the locality. It is true that Section 153 A is a grave offence. But when a matter has been settled between the parties and on account of the settlement, if harmony has been restored between the two communities and peace has been brought in the locality, then such settlement has to be promoted by the court and pendency of the case should not be a hurdle for the same. Further, in view of the settlement neither the defacto complainant nor the witnesses is likely to support the case of the prosecution and conviction in such case will be remote as well. Allowing the prosecution to continue only amount to wastage of judicial time as well.
7. Further in the decision reported in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:
“But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre- dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc., or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. 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 the criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”
8. In view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that the matter has been settled between the parties and in view of the settlement, possibility of conviction is remote even if the trial of the case is allowed to proceed with and the relationship has been restored between parties on account of the settlement, this Court feels that this is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be invoked to quash the proceedings to promote the settlement and the harmony that has been restored between the parties and peace has to be established in the locality.
9. So, the application is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.No.217/13 (Crime No.219/2009 of Kasaragod police station) pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasaragod as against the petitioners is quashed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately.
Sd/-
K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.
cl /true copy/ P.S to Judge