IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 29TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3700 of 2010(D) -------------------------------------- [L.P.C.194/2007 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE] .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- GERMAN HASSAN, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.GERMAN MUHAMMED @ MOIDU,R/AT PUTHARIYADUKKAN, CHATTAMCHAL,THEKKIL VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH. RESPONDENTS/STATE & CW NO.1 IE. DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE-REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. P.KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.KOMAN NAIR,R/AT BANDICHAL,THEKKIL P.O, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN – 671 317. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUZHPALATHA, R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3700 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 20th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner was seventh accused in C.C.42/2002 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kasaragod. Petitioner and accused 5,8 and 14 absconded. When remaining 12 accused were tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in C.C.42/2002, case against absconding accused including the petitioner was re-filed as C.C.245/2006. By Annexure-IV judgment, accused 1 to 4, 6,9 to 12, 15 and 16 were acquitted. Subsequently when presence of accused No.14 was procured, he was tried in C.C.298/2007 along with the petitioner. But petitioner absconded during trial. Hence case against him was split up and re-filed Crmc 3700/10 2 as C.C.730/2007. After trial 14th accused was acquitted by Annexure-V judgment. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case now pending against him as L.P.194/2007 contending that in view of the order of acquittal against the co-accused and also on the settlement arrived with the second respondent, de facto complainant, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that statement of the second respondent recorded subsequently Crmc 3700/10 3 establishes that there has been a settlement. 4. Annexure-IV judgment shows that prosecution case is that on account of political enmity towards members of CPI(M), 16 accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object trespassed into the Area Committee Office of CPI(M) at Chattanchal and caused damages to the furniture and documents to the tune of Rs.65,150/- and criminally intimidated second respondent at about 9 p.m on 1/6/2001 and thereby committed the offences under Sections 143, 148, 451, 435, 427 and 506(ii) read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-IV judgment shows that when 12th accused appeared before Chief Judicial Magistrate and was tried, only the second respondent and three witnesses were examined Crmc 3700/10 4 and their evidence establish that none of the accused could be identified and it was revealed that there has been settlement between the second respondent and the accused. As no evidence would be available against the accused, D.D.P who is conducting the prosecution, examination of the remaining witnesses were given up. Consequently the accused were acquitted. When 14th accused was tried, as is seen from Annexure-V judgment, more witnesses were examined in addition to the two witnesses examined earlier. Learned Magistrate found that nobody identified the persons who allegedly trespassed into the party office and committed the offences. Annexure-VI copy of the decision of Thekkil Local Committee office of CPI(M) reveals that the second respondent was authorised to file Crmc 3700/10 5 statement necessary to withdraw the case against the petitioner. In the light of the evidence already recorded and Annexure-VII agreement entered into by the second respondent with the petitioner and the affidavit filed by the second respondent it is clear that no purpose will be served by directing the petitioner to undergo the ordeal of a trial, except wasting the valuable time of the Court, as there is no chance of successful prosecution. Petition is allowed. L.P.194/2007 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kasaragod is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.