Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 2983/2014 was filed by the accused Nos. 1 to 19 in Crime No.616/2014 of Ochira Police Station and Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 2986/2014 was filed by the accused Nos. 1 to 14 in Crime No.615/2014 of the same Police Station, both for quashing the case, on the basis of settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in both the petitions that, the petitioners in both the petitions are students of Amrutha Arts College and Amrutha Engineering College, Amruthapury Campus, Kollam. Petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2983/2014 were studying for BBM course, while petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2986/2014 were studying in Mechanical Engineering wing situated in the same campus.
There was some difference of opinion between them and on account of that an incident happened on 08.04.2014 and on the basis of the statement given by the first respondent in Criminal M.C. No.2983/2014, crime No.616/2014 of Ochira Police Station was registered against the petitioners in that case, alleging offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 447, 323, 324, 294(b) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. In respect of the same incident, on the basis of the statement given by the first respondent in Crl.M.C.No.2986/2014, another crime was registered as Crime No.615/2014 of the same police station against the petitioners in that case, alleging offences under Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 294(b) and read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also an admitted fact that, in order to make the situations smooth in the college campus, the office bearers of parent teachers association, parents of the petitioners and the college authorities, intervened and now the matter has been settled between them. So both the defacto-complainants and the injured persons in both these crimes do not want to prosecute the cases. Some of the offences are non-compoundable in nature and it is in the crime stage. So neither the police nor the court will drop the proceedings at that stage. No purpose will be served by allowing the investigation to continue or the trial of the case to continue on the later stage. They have no other remedy, except to approach this court seeking the following reliefs:
Crl.M.C.No.2983/2014 “It is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash Annexure-A first information report and further proceedings in Crime No.616/2014 on the file of Ochira Police Station in the interests of justice.”
Crl.M.C. 2986/2014 “It is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash Annexure-A first information report and further proceedings in Crime No.615/2014 on the file of Ochira Police Station in the interests of justice.”
3. The defacto-complainant and the injured in both the cases, who were shown as respondents in respective cases appeared through counsel and submitted that, the matter has been settled between the parties and it was an incident occurred between two groups of students studying in different faculty on account of some mis- understanding and with the intervention of parents and others the matter has been settled and they do not want to prosecute each other. Further they also stated that, they have filed affidavits showing these facts as well.
4. The counsel for the petitioners in both the cases submitted that, in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction and good atmosphere has been restored in the college premises on account of the settlement.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions as directed by this court submitted that, there is no other case against the petitioners but opposed the applications on the ground that, it is in the investigation stage and at this stage the same cannot be quashed.
6. It is an admitted fact that, petitioners in both the cases are students of Amrutha Arts College and Engineering College and both are in the same campus. It is also seen from the averments in both the petitions that, there was some difference of opinion between the students of BBM course in Amrutha Arts College and Mechanical Engineering students of Amrutha Engineering College. An incident happened on 08.04.2014 in which both the petitioners sustained injuries. On the basis of the statement given by the first respondent in Crl.M.C. 2983/2014, Crime No.616/2014 was registered and this first respondent was shown as 15th petitioner in Crl.M.C.2986/2014. Similarly, on the basis of the statement given by first respondent in Crl.M.C. 2986/2014, Crime No.615/2014 was registered and he is the first petitioner in Crl.M.C. No.2983/2014. Since it is a dispute between two student groups studying in two faculty in the same campus and it affects the peaceful atmosphere of the campus, the college authorities, parent- teachers association and the parents of these petitioners intervened and the matter has been amicably settled due to their intervention and that brought peaceful atmosphere in the campus itself, otherwise, the educational prospects of other students also will be affected, if it was allowed to continue. In view of the settlement, both the injured have decided, not to prosecute each other as a part of the settlement and they want to promote friendship and restore the friendship that was prevailing prior of the incident. So in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of any of the witnesses or injured supporting the investigation or even if ultimately final report is filed, no conviction will be possible in such cases. Further since, the incident happened between students, later they realised their mistake and wanted to repent for the same, for the sake of their future, courts must always promote such settlement in order to bring harmony among the student community.
7. In the decision reported Gian Singh v.
State of Punjab [2012(4) KLT 108 (SC)], it reads as follows:
“The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceedings or FIR 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 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 FIR may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case an 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 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, it is a dispute between two student community, which resulted in the registration of both crimes and it was settled due to the intervention of all the interested parties including the parents, parent teachers association and the college authorities and restored the relationship and friendship among the student community and no purpose will be served by proceeding with the investigation or the trial of the case later final report is filed as conviction in such cases will remote and it will be only amount to wastage of judicial time, this court feels that, it is a fit case, where the power under Section 482 of the Code has to be invoked to quash further proceedings in order to promote settlement and bring harmony and peace in the education institutional campus.
Applications are allowed and further proceedings in Crime No.616/2014 of Ochira police station against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2983/2014 and Crime No.615/2014 of Ochira police station against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.No.2986/2014 are hereby quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karunagappally, and inform the same to the concerned police station for necessary further action in this regard.
Sd/-
K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy// P.A. to Judge ss