IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3909 of 2009() --------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.704/2009 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 AND 2: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. UMMAR, S/O. MOHAMMED, AGED 33 YEARS, VDAKKANOLI HOUSE, KATHIKKODE DESOM, KOOLIMUTTAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 2. NAZAR, S/O. ABDULKHADER, AGED 34 YEARS, NJARAKKATTIL HOUSE, PONMANIKUTAM, PERINJANAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. BY ADV. MR.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENT(S): DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, CHALAKUDY. 2. MOHAMMED, S/O. AMMUNJI, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHOONDAYIL HOUSE, PERUMBADAPPU DESOM, CHENTRAPPINNI, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.3909 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 8th January 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in crime no.704/2009 of Mathilakam police station now pending as C.C.944/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodungallur taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 408 and 120 B of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A final report. Prosecution case is that first petitioner is the employee of Alban Hujj Umra Services and they conspired together to misappropriate Rs.2,50,000/- collected by first petitioner, for Alban Hujj Umra Services and in furtherance of the conspiracy, on 30/7/2009 at 4.15 p.m made Crmc 3909/09 2 the second respondent believe that while the amount was being taken to the second respondent, the first accused was taken away by some persons who came there in a car and thereafter removed took away the cash from him and thereby misappropriated Rs.2,50,000/- collected and committed the offences under Sections 408 and 120 B of Indian Penal Code. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that the offences alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature as against second respondent and entire disputes with the second respondent have been settled amicably and in view of settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a Crmc 3909/09 3 counsel and filed an affidavit stating that first petitioner is the employee and petitioners compensated him for the amount misappropriated and consequently he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners and as per religious practice before going to Haj, cases are to be settled and therefore, second respondent has settled all the disputes and hence he has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure-B final report establishes that prosecution case is that petitioners conspired together, to misappropriate the amount collected by the first petitioner as an employee of second respondent and due to Crmc 3909/09 4 second respondent and pursuant to the conspiracy, misappropriated Rs.2,50,000/- so collected, after making the second respondent believe that while money was being carried to the second respondent, some persons came in a car and took away the money. The offences alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that second respondent has already been compensated by the petitioners and he has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioners. As held by the Apex court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) when the offences alleged are purely personal in nature and there has been settlement of the dispute with second respondent with the petitioners, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the Crmc 3909/09 5 prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.944/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kodungallur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.