In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KADAKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695306 PRAVEEN AGED 32 YEARS S/O ANILKUMAR, PANTHYIL VEEDU, THEKKUM BHAGAM, CHEERAYAN KEEZHU THALUK THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-, PIN - 695101 OTHER PRESENT: SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.MC NO. 3367 OF 2024 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ----------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 3367 of 2024 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024 ORDER Petitioners have invoked the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash all proceedings against them.

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in S.C.No.1642 of 2022 on the files of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Nedumangad, arising out of Crime No. 219 of 2018 of Kadakkavoor Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 324 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and under Sections 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment 2015). Third respondent is the defacto complainant.

According to the prosecution, the defacto complainant, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste, was insulted by calling his caste name and assaulted him with a weapon, thereby committing the offences alleged. CRL.MC NO. 3367 OF 2024 3

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent, apart from the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the matter has been settled and hence the proceedings against the petitioners ought to be quashed. It was also submitted that, considering the nature of offences alleged, no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], the Apex Court has held that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings. This view was reiterated in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2014) 6 SCC 466] and Yogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Jharkhand and Another [(2014) 9 SCC 653].

I have perused Annexure A3 affidavit filed by the 3 rd respondent. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that upon verification, it is understood that the affidavit is genuine, and the defacto complainant stands by the contents thereof. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled and CRL.MC NO. 3367 OF 2024 4 no public interest is involved in this case. There is no impediment for granting the prayer for quashing. The continuance of the proceedings will only be an exercise in futility.

Accordingly, all proceedings against the petitioners in S.C.No.1642 of 2022 on the files of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Nedumangad are quashed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Sd/- AJM BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE CRL.MC NO. 3367 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3367/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 Annexure A2 Annexure A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO: 219/2018 OF KADAKAVOOR POLICE STATION THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT NOW PENDING BEFORE SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATTROCITIES) NEDUMANGAD AS SC NO 1642/2022 THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE PETITIONER/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IS DATED ON 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2024