IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3710 of 2009() ----------------------------------- LPC 228/2008 IN CC.221/2004 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, MATTANNUR CRIME NO.15/2004 OF IRITTY POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ IST ACCUSED ---------------------------------------- A.C. BABU, S/O.CHACKO, ALUNGAL HOUSE, PAYAM.P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------------------------------- 1. C.O. VINOD, SENIOR MANGER, SREE GOKULAM CHIT AND FINANCE CO(P)LTD., MISHAL COMPLEX, NEW BUS STAND, IRITTY. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IRITTY POLICE STATION. 3. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.S. SIVAKUMAR. R1 BY ADV. MR.P.K.ANIL. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.3710 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 3rd December 2009 ORDER Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.221/2004 now pending as L.P.228/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mattannur, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 420 and 468 of Indian Penal Code against second accused. According to the petitioner second accused is no more. First respondent is the de facto complainant. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings before the learned Magistrate contending that entire disputes with the first respondent was settled out of court amicably and in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Annexure-II communication received from first respondent is produced, which shows that as entire liability has been cleared by the first respondent the dispute was settled with the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel appearing for Crmc 3710/09 2 petitioner, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that as is clear from Annexure-II entire disputes were settled and in such circumstances, the case is to be quashed. Learned counsel appearing for first respondent submitted that as the entire amount due to first respondent has been received, first respondent has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 4. Annexure-I final report filed by Sub Inspector of police, Iritty police station establish that case against petitioner and second accused is that in furtherance of their common intention, petitioner signed the cheque in the name of second accused and entrusted it to first respondent and thereby offences under Sections 420 and 468 of Indian Penal Code were committed. Offences alleged are purely personal in nature as against the first respondent. When first respondent has settled the disputes amicably with the petitioner, as is evident from Annexure-II, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, as held by the Apex court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State Crmc 3710/09 3 of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC). Petition is allowed. L.P.228/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mattannur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.