IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 696 of 2009(D) ----------------------------- CC.6/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, PERINTHALMANNA (CRIME NO.6/95 OF VENGARA POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED; -------------------------------- KALLAN SUBAIR, S/O.MUHAMMEDKUTTY HAJI, CHINAKKAL, VALIYORA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VENGARA POLICE STATION-THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 2. KHADEEJA, W/O.LATE AHAMMED MUNSHI, CHINAKKAL, VALIYORA, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 696 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.6/09 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Perinthalmanna. The petitioner herein is the 9th accused in crime No.6/95 of the Vengara Police Station and is alleged to have committed offences u/Ss. 143, 147, 148, 324, 447, 427 r/w S.149 IPC. The cases against some of the accused were tried as C.C.147/95 which ended in conviction and later in appeal Crl.A.No.87/97. The sentence and conviction were set aside and all were acquitted. The defacto complainant was one Ahammed Munshi and his wife Khadeeja. This Ahammed Munshi is no more and Khadeeja has filed an affidavit before this Court stating that the matter has been settled between her and the accused as well and she had no objection in quashing the criminal cases against them. Crl.M.C. 696 OF 2009 -:2:- 2. We are only concerned with the 9th accused now in this matter. A competent Court of jurisdiction after elaborate consideration had found that some of the accused were not guilty and had acquitted them. Now the matter has been settled between the legal heir of the defacto complainant and the accused. The Apex Court also held that while invoking the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. it is the duty of the Court to see that what will be the position if the matter is permitted to continue. It is also stated that if the dispute is of a personal nature the Court can certainly entertain and quash even though the offences committed are non- compoundable. Here the gravity of the offences cannot be said to be very high like Ss.302 or 307 or 304(b) and the settlement of which has been deprecated by the Apex Court in Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417). Now they are not major offences, of course of which some of them are non-compoundable. Since the matter has been settled and the personal grievance of the defacto complainant is over and as no useful purpose will be served Crl.M.C. 696 OF 2009 -:3:- by permitting the prosecution to continue I feel the power u/s 482 can be invoked to quash the criminal proceedings. Therefore the Crl.M.C. is allowed and all proceedings in C.C.6/09 of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Perinthalmanna are quashed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-