This is an application filed by the accused Nos.1 to 10 in C.C.No.402/2013 pending before the Judicial First class Magistrate's Court – I, Thamarassery to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement under Section 482 of the code o Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called as the 'Code') 2. It is alleged in the petition that petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 10 in Crime No.239/2013 of Thamarassery Police station which was registered on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent as de facto complainant alleging commission of offence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Apart from the de facto complainant-respondent, CW2 who is shown as respondent No.3 also sustained injury in the incident.
3. It was a clash between the sympathizers of S.S.F.party and Indian Union Muslim League. Both belong to same community. After investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C. No. 402/2013 and it is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Thamarassery. Between the same faction, some other incidents also happened and C.C.No.403/2013 and 578/2013 were also pending before the same court in respect of those incidents happened between the same two groups. Since it happened between the two factions of the same community on account of their political ideology, due to the intervention of well wishers and community leaders, the matter has been settled between the parties and they have decided to withdraw all the criminal cases in connection with this factional difference. Since some of the offences are non compoundable in nature, they could not file an application before the concerned magistrate court on account of the settlement no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case as well. So they have no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following relief:
to quash the proceedings as against the petitioners/accused 1 to 10 pursuant to Annexure A final report in Crime No.239/2013 registered by Thamarassery police station now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thamarassery as C.C.No.402/2013 in the interest of justice.
4. Respondents 2 and 3 appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of community leaders and on account of the settlement they do not want to prosecute the case and they filed Annexures F and G affidavits respectively stating these facts.
5. The counsel for the petitioners also submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of any conviction and so he prayed for allowing the application.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions as directed by this Court, submitted that except these cases there is no other case between these parties and it was a clash between two groups of same community and in such cases the power under Section 482 of the Code need not be invoked to quash the proceedings.
7. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of the statement given by the second respondent, Thamarassery police has registered Crime No. 239/2013 of that police station against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. After investigation, Annexure A final report was filed and the case was taken on file as C.C.No.402/2013 and now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thamarassery. Now the matter has been settled between the parties. It is an admitted fact that both these accused as well as the de fcto complainant and respondent 3 belongs to same community namely muslim community. Due to some political ideological difference, there was some split in the community and they showed the allegiance to the Indian Muslim League party and SSF party respectively and then difference of opinion arose and clashes occurred and some other cases have been registered in respect of those incidents. Now the matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of mediators and well wishers and the party leaders and community leaders so as to bring harmony among the members of the community. It is true that the people are now forgetting the fact the religion is intended for the welfare of the people and they should not be over govern by the religion. They are only expected to follow the preaching of the religion to lead a perfect life. But that principle is being violated and this is being misused for their personal purposes which resulted in clashes like this causing difference of opinion among the same community as well. It is true that such fanatic vandalism in the name of the religion should not be encouraged as submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. But considering the fact that settlement has been arrived at due to the intervention of all the persons concerned in the same community to bring harmony among the members of the community and on account of the settlement there is no possibility of any conviction as well as none of the prosecution witnesses will support the case of the prosecution and conviction of such cases will be remote. There is no purpose in proceeding with the case as it will amount to wastage of judicial time alone.
9. Further the decision reported in Gian Singh V. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)] the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:
“The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing in criminal proceeding or F.I.R. or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under S.320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. 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 case, 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 proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding 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 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.”
10. In view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that it is a clash between the same community people and on account of the settlement harmony has been brought in among the community people hoping that this will lead a better future and avoid unnecessary tension in the locality and in view of the settlement conviction will be remote. This court feels that the power under Section 482 of the Code can be invoked to quash the proceedings in order to promote the settlement which this Court, hope and believe has brought harmony among the people belong to the same community and further clashes in the locality will be avoided on account of this settlement and they will try to live on the belief that the religion is for their benefit and it should not be used as a weapon to promote fanaticism and bring hatredness among the same community people and others as well.
So the petition is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.402/2013 (Crime No.239/2013 of Thamarassery Police Station pending before the Judicial First class Magistrate's Court – I, Thamarassery as against the petitioners is hereby quashed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately for necessary action.
Sd/-K.RAMAKRISHNAN JUDGE MJL