P. VIJESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 2675/2015 is the sole accused in Crime No. 349/2012 of Nileshwar Police Station, Kasargod district, now pending as S.C. No. 94/2015 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge -II, Kasargod. The offences involved are those punishable under Secs. 324 and 323 of the I.P.C. The prosecution allegation is that on 10.6.2015, at about 20 Hrs. the accused had intercepted the defacto complainant in connection with disputes relating to caroms game near the Purusha Swayam Sahaya Sangam office adjacent to the Nileshwaram Block Office in Perol village and slapped the defacto complainant and thus committed the above offences. The 2nd respondent herein is the defacto complainant in the instant Crime No. 349/2012. It is also pointed out that a counter case was registered as Crime No. 348/2012 of Nileshwar Police Station against the 2nd respondent in Crl. M.C. No. 2675/2015, for offences under Secs. 341, 323, 326, 308 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC. The 2nd respondent in Crl. M.C. No. 2675/2015 has filed Crl. M.C. No. 2676/2015 with a prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings pending against him arising out of the above said Crime No. 348/2012. The prayer in Crl. M.C. No. 2675/2015 is to quash the entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner therein arising out of the Crime No. 349/2012 of the above said Police Station. The allegation in relation to the crime in respect of Crl. M.C. No. 2676/2015 is in connection with disputes relating to caroms game on 10.6.2012 at about 20 Hrs. The accused therein intercepted the defacto complainant near the Pratheeksha Purusha Swayam Sahaya Sangam office adjacent to the Nileshwaram Block Office in Perol village and slapped the defacto complainant and stabbed on the right side of his stomach and attempted to stab on his chest and if the defacto complainant has not evaded from that attempt, his death might have been caused and thus he committed the offence.

(2.) IT is submitted on behalf of the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 2765/2015 and the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 2676/2015 that the entire disputes arose between these two sets of rival parties in relation to caroms game near the Purusha Swayam Sahaya Sangam office adjacent to the Nileshwaram Block office in Perol Village and this is the case even set up in the impugned FIRs in both the crimes. The contesting respondents 2 and 3 in Crl. M.C. No. 2675/2015 are the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 2676/2015 and contesting respondent No. 2 in Crl. M.C. No. 2676/2015. The contesting respondent No. 2 in Crl. M.C. No. 2676/2015 is the petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 2675/2015. The contesting respondents in these two respective Criminal Miscellaneous Cases have sworn to affidavits, which are produced in these cases, stating that the entire disputes between the rival parties have been settled and agreements in that regard have also been executed making out the compromise and the said documents are also produced in these Criminal Miscellaneous Cases. The respective contesting respondents in these cases have also stated that they have no objection whatsoever for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending as against the respective petitioners in these cases. It is also to be noted that going by very allegations projected in these respective crimes, the time and date of occurrence is 20 Hrs. on 10.6.2012 and it is exclusively stated in the FIRs registered by the Police in the aforesaid crimes that the entire disputes arose out of caroms game near the venue near the Nileshwaram Block office. The allegation in one crime is that the accused therein had intercepted the defacto complainant concerned. Therefore, on a mere reading of the projection of the case made out in the impugned FIRs is that the entire disputes arose out of caroms game played near the venue in question and the conflicting versions, one intercepting the other, which led to the impugned incidents appear to be inherently contradictory. The learned Advocates appearing for the contesting respondents in these two cases have also submitted that their parties have no objection for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings and that this Court may consider the said plea in the light of the settlement and also taking into account the harmony and peace that have been secured by virtue of such settlement. The learned Public Prosecutor would also submit that the prayer may be considered in the light of the law declared by the Supreme Court.The Apex Court in the case in Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr. reported in : (2014) 6 SCC 466, has laid down various guidelines in paragraph 29 of that decision in the matter of judicial exercise of discretion for consideration of quashment. Paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the above said reported decision read as follows:

(3.) IN the case Yogendra Yadav & ors. v. State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in 2014 (8) SCALE 634, the Apex Court had quashed the impugned criminal proceedings therein involving offences under Secs. 326, 307 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC. Assessing the fact situation in the present case it can be seen that the entire incidents arose out of differences of opinion between rival parties during a caroms game. Though the final report has been filed, the court has not framed charge. Therefore, the prayer for quashment could be considered going by the contradictory versions in these two different crimes, which are essentially involving the case and counter cases, since the date and time of occurrence in both these crimes are the same, the allegation and the cross allegation against the respective parties disclose a situation of inherently high improbable at least of one version of the incident. Taking into account all these aspects, this Court is of the considered opinion that the power available under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C. could be invoked in this case.