This is an application filed by the accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C.No. 1861/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad to quash the proceedings in view of the settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called as the 'Code').
2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C.No.1861/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad. The above case was originated on the basis of private complaint filed by the second respondent against the petitioners alleging that the petitioners have conspired together and created false documents in respect of the shop room belonging to the mother of the de facto complainant and created documents and using these false documents as genuine documents obtained license to conduct business in the shop room from the Guruvayoor Municipality and thereby they have committed the offences punishable under Sections 120 (B), 420, 465, 468, 471 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal code. He filed two complaints in respect of these transactions one in respect of creating documents in respect of the shop and other in respect of obtaining license from the Guruvayoor Municipality using these false documents. Both these complaints were forwarded to the police by the learned Magistrate and two crimes were registered namely the present Crime No.141/2012 of Guruvayoor Police Station and another Crime was also registered and after the completion of investigation separate final reports were filed and they were taken on file as C.C.No.1861/2013 and 1675/2013 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad against the same petitioners.
3. The petitioner filed Crl.M.C.No.639/2014 before this Court for quashing C.C.No.1675/2013 and this Court by judgment dated 20/01/2014 quashed the proceedings. Now the present case has been settled between the parties. Since some of the offences are non compoundable in nature, they could not file application before the concerned Magistrate's court for compounding. So the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief.
1. “Quash the proceedings pending against the petitioner as C.C.No.1861/2013 of JFCM, Chavakkad arising from Crime No.141 of 2012 of Guruvayoor Police Station, Thrissur District.
2. Grant such other relief deemed fit to this Hon'ble Court.”
4. Second respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and the connected case was quashed by this Court and he has no objection in quashing the proceedings. He had filed Annexure B affidavit stating these facts.
5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the matter has been settled between the parties and the connected case which was registered on the basis of similar allegations was quashed by this Court on the basis of settlement, no purpose will be served by keeping this case on file and so he prayed for allowing the application.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions, as directed by this Court submitted that there was no other case against the petitioners but opposed the application on the ground that serious offences were alleged have been committed.
7. Heard both sides.
8. It is an admitted fact that the shop room belongs to the mother of the de facto complainant and the petitioners were in possession of the building. After the death of the mother of the de facto complainant, when the de facto complainant came to know that some documents have been created forging the signature of his mother, he filed two complaints before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad which was forwarded to the police and Guruvayoor police has registered Crime No.141/2012 and another crime against the petitioners alleging offences under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 120(B) and Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, separate final reports were filed in both the cases and they were taken on file as C.C.No.1861/2013 and 1675/2013, both on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad. Both these cases were settled between the parties. The petitioners herein filed Crl.M.C. 639/2014 before this Court to quash the proceedings in C.C. NO.1675/2013 and this Court by order dated 20/01/2014 allowed the application to quash the proceedings accepting the settlement. The present case also arose on the basis of similar allegations. This case was also settled between the parties now. Further it is a property transaction between the parties and it is not having any public interest. Now they have settled the property dispute due to the intervention of mediators.
So no purpose will be served by allowing the case to continue in view of the settlement and conviction of such cases will be remote as well.
9. In 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 the matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of mediators and the connected case in respect of the same shop room which was obtained by using the alleged forged document in this case has been quashed by this Court and in view of the settlement, no purpose will be served by keeping the case on file as conviction of such cases will be remote and it will be only a wastage of Judicial time as well, this Court feels that it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of the Code has to be invoked to quash the proceedings. So the application is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.No.1861/2013 (Crime No.141/2012 of Guruvayoor Police Station) now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad as against the petitioners is quashed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately for necessary further action in this regard.
Sd/-K.RAMAKRISHAN JUDGE MJL