IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2011 / 7TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4937 of 2010 ------------------------- (CRIME NO. 441 OF 2009 OF KONNI POLICE STATION. SC.329/2010 of SESSIONS COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CP.89/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT- II,PATHANAMTHITTA ) PETITIONER/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------ VEENA, AGED 19 YEARS, D/O.VALSALA, PALLILETHU HOUSE,VENMELIPPADI,ARUVAPPULAM VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED,COMPLAINANT AND STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUKESH, LAKSHMANAN KUTTY NAIR, SURASSU BHAVAN, PRAMADOM, VELLAPPARA, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR, KONNI POLICE STATION. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.PRAKASH KESAVAN BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV. MR. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4937 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2011. ORDER This petition is filed by the defacto complainant in Crime No.441 of 2009 of Konni Police Station and S.C.No.329 of 2010 of the court of learned Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta for offences punishable under Sections 450, 354 and 511 of Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the IPC”). Petitioner has stated that a settlement is reached with respondent No.1, accused and that she does not want to proceed with the case. 2. I have heard learned counsel and the Public Prosecutor. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has confirmed after getting instruction that the settlement pleaded by petitioner is correct. 4. The alleged incident occurred at the house of petitioner. On a prior occasion respondent No.1 filed Crl.M.C.No.709 of 2010 in this Court to quash proceedings against him. There, a contention was raised that no offence under Section 511 of 376 of the IPC is made out. This Court by order dated May 28, 2010 while disposing of the said Criminal Miscellaneous Case directed the learned Sessions Judge to consider that question at the time of preliminary hearing under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is later that the matter was settled between petitioner and respondent No.1. Petitioner has filed Annexure-IV (1 and 2), affidavits stating that the matter has been settled Crl.M.C.No.4937/2010 2 between her and respondent No.1, her marriage with one Umesh was scheduled to be held on 22.11.2010 (Annexure-II is the wedding invitation card) and in the circumstances, since the continuation of case may affect her future and as she wanted to go abroad the case may be allowed to be settled. 5. Offence is purely personal to and between petitioner and respondent No.1. It would appear that respondent No.1 was taking tuition for petitioner during the relevant time and the alleged incident occurred at the house of petitioner. She is now married to another person and is staying abroad. Continuance of the case might mar her future. Moreover, there is also no possibility of a success of prosecution. In the circumstances I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed and the final report in Crime No. 441 of 2009 of Konni Police Station, proceedings in C.P.No.89 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Pathanamthitta and further proceedings in S.C.No.329 of 2010 of the court of learned Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta will stand quashed against respondent No.1/accused. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks