IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1620 of 2011() ------------------------- CC.541/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, CHERTHALA .................... (CRIME NO.435/09 OF KUTHIATHODE POLICE STATION) ... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- 1. BIJU THOMAS,S/O.THOMAS,VETTUVELIL HOUSE, NEAR POONITHURA GOVERNMENT GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL, WARD NO.XIII,THRIPUNITHURA MUNICIPALITY,COCHIN. 2. AZAD,S/O.AZEEZ,KAIPALLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALOOR,PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 133 C,DLSS TOWER, KALOOR,COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL, SRI.M.A.JOSEPH MANAVALAN. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUTHIYATHODU POLICE STATION,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SURESH,S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN,.KANNANTHARA HOUSE,XTH WARD,KODAMTHURUTHU PANCHAYATH, KUTHIATHODE.P.O,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU R2 BY ADV. SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1620 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.435 of 2009 of Kuthiyathodu Police Station and C.C.No.541 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Cherthala for offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”). First petitioner is the Branch Manager and second petitioner is the authorized collection agent of M/s.Kodak Mahindra Fianance Company. According to the second respondent, petitioners committed theft of an innova car bearing registration No.KL 32-2716 belonging to him. Petitioners say that the second respondent purchased that vehicle as per a hire purchase agreement with the company, second respondent defaulted payment of instalments and thereon by virtue of the terms and conditions of the hire purchase agreement the vehicle was taken to custody which did not amount to theft under Section 379 of the IPC. Petitioners seek to quash proceeding against them on the strength of a settlement reached with the second respondent. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel for petitioners and second respondent confirmed the settlement. Annexure-IV is the award passed by the Lok Adalath on 14.03.2010 whereby the dispute between the parties was settled. In clause 7 of Crl.MC No.1620/2011 2 the award it is stated that C.C.No.435 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Cherthala will also be settled as per the law and necessary steps in that regard will be taken (learned counsel submits that the C.C. number mentioned is a mistake and that C.C. number is 541 of 2010 while the Crime No.435 of 2009). There is also a joint petition signed by petitioners, second respondent and their counsel apart from the affidavit sworn by the second respondent. Genuineness and authenticity of the joint petition and affidavit are confirmed by the learned counsel on both sides. 3. Though the offence involved is under Section 379 of the IPC it flows from an alleged violation of the terms and conditions of a hire purchase agreement. That dispute has been settled between the parties. Hence I am inclined to interfere. Resultantly this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.435 of 2009 of Kuthiyathodu Police Station, cognizance taken and proceeding against petitioners/accused 1 and 2 in C.C.No.541 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Cherthala are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks