IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2010 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 542 of 2010(A) ------------------------------------ (C.C. NO. 699/2008 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE -II, PERINTALMANNA, CRIME NO. 765/2001 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE STATION (CBCID CRIME NO.251/CR/03 OF MALAPPURAM). ........... PETITIONER/9TH ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- LATHEEF, S/O.MOYINKUTTY, ELANHIKKAL HOUSE, NENMINI AMSOM NALLOOR DESOM, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.DEVIDAS.U.K. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. JOSEPH @ THANKACHAN, S/O.ANTONY, MATTATHIL HOUSE, PUZHAKATTIRI AMSOM PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SIBI, S/O.ANTONY, MATTATHIL HOUSE, MALAPARAMBA, PUZHAKATTIRI AMSOM PERINTALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DY.S.P.OF POLICE, CBCID, MALAPPURAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR. V.MOHAMED RAFEQUE, R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. I.B. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.542 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner was the 9th accused and respondents 1 and 2, the defacto complainant and the victim in C.C. No.912/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Perinthalmanna. Prosecution case is that on 10.10.2001 at about 12 noon, accused 1 to 5, in furtherance of the common object, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and abducted second respondent from the compound of Alshifa Hospital, Perinthalmanna, under the pretext of taking him to donate blood for his sister and forcibly took in a jeep, bearing a fake number, to Manjeri and confined him there and thereafter took him to Gudallur of Tamil Nadu and confined him there for five days and while under confinement, injuries were inflicted on him by all the accused and thereby, they committed offences under Sections 143, 147, 365, 323 and 120(B) read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. As petitioner and 12th accused were absconding, the case as against them was split up and the remaining accused were tried by the CRMC 542/10 2 learned Magistrate. By Annexure-II judgment, as the defacto complainant and the victim and the eye witnesses turned hostile, learned Magistrate acquitted those accused. The case against the petitioner and 12th accused was refiled as C.C.No.699/2008. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that in view of the order of acquittal against the other co- accused and also in view of the settlement of the disputes with respondents 1 and 2, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Respondents 1 and 2 appeared through a counsel and filed separate affidavits stating that they have settled all the disputes with the accused and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure-II judgment in C.C.No.912/2003 establishes that out of the thirteen accused, eleven were acquitted based on the evidence adduced by the prosecution. It also establishes that the defacto CRMC 542/10 3 complainant and the victim and the eye witnesses all turned hostile. Affidavits filed by respondents 1 and 2 establish that there has been a complete settlement of the disputes with the accused. In such circumstances, it is clear that even if petitioner and 12th accused are to be tried, three is no likelihood of a successful prosecution. It would only result in unnecessary waste of valuable time of the court. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), even though the offences alleged against the petitioner are not compoundable, when there has been a complete settlement of the disputes with the accused and consequent to the settlement there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution and when out of thirteen accused, eleven were already acquitted after recording their evidence, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.699/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Perinthalmanna is quashed. 2nd March, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv