IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.MC.No. 4753 of 2008() 1. K.M.UMESH, 25 YEARS, S/O.K.V.MANY Petitioner 2. RAISAL.,M.A., 24 YEARS, S/O.P.H.ANTHRU, 3. SURESH.J., 42 YEARS, S/O.JANARDHANAN.A, Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC Respondent 2. MANAGER (LAW AND ADMINISTRATION) For Petitioner :SRI.P.SIVARAJ For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Hon'ble MR. Justice [ENTITY] Dated :17/12/2008 O R D E R [ENTITY], J [CASE NUMBER] Dated this the 17th day of December, 2008 ORDER
Petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under [SECTION]/[SECTION] [ACT] Altogether there are 3 accused and they are the petitioners. They were employees of the 2nd respondent - [ENTITY] The crux of the allegations is that the petitioners as employees of the 2nd respondent indulged in questionable culpable overt acts for the purpose of aggrandizing themselves. They allegedly had created false documents to make it appear that they have received waste paper, which they actually had not received. Excess payments were made to the person who is alleged to have supplied such paper. Investigation was in progress. At that stage, the parties settled their disputes. An agreement has been executed between the parties, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-3. An affidavit duly signed by the complainant is also produced to confirm such settlement/composition. The dispute is one which is private and personal between the contestants. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under [SECTION] [ACT] as enabled by the dictum in [PRECEDENT], [PRECEDENT]] and [PRECEDENT]] may be invoked to bring to premature termination the prosecution against the petitioners.
2. The learned Public Prosecutor after taking instructions confirms that the investigation is now complete and the final report has already been filed in November, 2008. The number of the case registered is not furnished to the Court by both sides.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the 2nd respondent pray, the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that the prosecution against the petitioners on the basis of the final report filed by the police can be prematurely terminated now.
4. In the result:
i) This Crl.M.C is allowed;
ii) The final report filed in [CASE NUMBER] of Binanipuram Police Station in which the petitioners are the accused and the 2nd respondent is the complainant, is hereby quashed;
iii) Needless to say, proceedings, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties under [SECTION] [ACT], shall be disposed of in accordance with law.
([ENTITY], JUDGE) rtr/-