IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3822 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CC.169/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, TRIVANDRUM. CRIME NO.376/2006 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. MIDHUN RAJ, SHASIDHARAN ASARI, MIDHUN NIVAS, ANAYARA WARD, ANAYARA MAHARAJAS LANE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. SUJITH KUMAR, S/O.SREEDHARAN, "DEVARAGAM" NEAR JAGATHY BRIDGE, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. BY ADVS. SRI.KKM.SHERIF SRI.A.A.ZIYAD RAHMAN SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH SRI.V.R.REKESH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR, MUSEUM COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. AJAYAKUMAR, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, PLAVILA VEEDU, CHILAMBIL DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKIL TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695304. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA R3 BY ADV. SMT.ANITHA M.N. (EKM) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3822 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are accused 3 and 4 in C.C.No. 169/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 341, 294 (b) and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A2 final report. Annexure-A2 final report reveals that prosecution case is that on 26.12.2006 at about 9.45 a.m., the four accused, in furtherance of their common intention, wrongfully restrained the third respondent and abused him and thereby committed the offences. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that entire disputes with the third respondent were amicably settled and third respondent has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners and therefore, the case is to be quashed. CRMC 3822/10 2 2. Third respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that the case was registered on his complaint and he happened to submit the complaint on a mistaken motion and subsequently, all the disputes were amicably settled with the accused and consequent to the settlement, he has no grievance against the accused and has no objection for terminating the prosecution prematurely. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, third respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure-A2 final report shows that the offences alleged against the accused are purely personal in nature against third respondent. The affidavit filed by the third respondent establishes that entire disputes with the accused were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, he has no subsisting grievance against the accused. CRMC 3822/10 3 5. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), when the offences alleged against the accused are purely personal in nature against third respondent and third respondent has settled the disputes with the accused and consequent to the settlement there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution, even if accused are to be tried and it would result only in unnecessary waste of valuable time of the court, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.169/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court- III, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed. 16th September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv