IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 876 of 2010() ------------------------ CRIME NO.250/2010 OF THALASSERY POLICE STATION ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/ACCUSED 2 AND 3 -------------------------------------------------- 1. K.BASHEER, S/O. MOOSA, AGED 52, BUSINESS, BIMYAZ, MELADI AMSOM DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. M.AMEER, S/O. HUSSAIN, AGED 35, BUSINESS, KUNHAMI MANZIL, CHETTAMKUNNU, THALASSERY. 3. CHANDRAN P., S/O. BAPPU, AGED 60, TEACHER, HOLY FAMILY, M.M.ROAD, THALASSERY. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.K.VISWAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA RESPONDENT(S): FORMAL PARTY/COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THALASSERY POLICE STATION, THALASSERY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U.NAZER THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dmb V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.876 OF 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010 ORDER Petitioners herein are the de facto complainant and accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.250/2010 of the Thalassery Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 120B IPC. The case of the complainant is that, accused Nos.2 and 3 along with accused Nos.1, 4 and 5 hatched a criminal conspiracy to cheat the 1st petitioner, (the de facto complainant) by promising to arrange a medical seat for his daughter in the Pariyaram Medical College and induced him to part with a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine lakh only) on two different dates. 2. The 2nd accused is a cousin of the de facto complainant and A3 is a friend of A2. According to the petitioners, the role of A2 and A3 was only to introduce to the de facto complainant; accused Nos.1, 4 and 5, who were the persons who promised to secure admission to the MBBS course and the money was actually paid to the 1st accused. The case between the petitioners inter se (ie; the de facto complaint, A2 and A3) has been settled as evidenced by Crl.M.C. No.876 OF 2010 : 2 : Annexure II petition, as per which they have purported to compound the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 120B IPC. Even though the offence other than the offences punishable under Section 420 IPC are non- compoundable offences, since the subject matter of the dispute between the petitioners is a money dispute, personal in character, I am inclined to apply the ratio in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2003 (3) KLT (19) SC]. Accordingly, the FIR in Crime No.250/2010 of the Thalassery Police Station as against the accused Nos.2 and 3 shall stand quashed and it will survive only as against the accused Nos.1, 4 and 5. This Criminal M.C is allowed as above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE dmb