IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 789 of 2011() ------------------------ CC.253/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHITTUR .................... (CRIME NO.119/2008 OF CHITTUR POLICE STATION) ... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ KANNAYAN, S/O.KANNIMUTHU GOUNDER, AGED 40 YEARS, MOOLATHARA VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SUBBULAKSHMI, W/O.KANNIMUTHU GOUNDER, AGED 64 YEARS, MOOLATHARA VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. NAGARAJ, S/O.KANNIMUTHU GOUNDER, AGED 44 YEARS, MOOLATHARA VILLAGE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.789 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 21st day of March, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is accused in Crime No.119 of 2008 of Chittur police station and C.C. No.253 of 2008 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur. Case is that he voluntarily caused hurt/grievous hurt to his father, by beating him with a stick on 17.03.2008 at about 9.00 a.m. Police after investigation submitted final report on which learned Magistrate took cognizance and filed C.C. No.253 of 2008. While so the de facto complainant expired on 20.07.2008. Petitioner and remaining legal heirs of the de facto complainant have come forward requesting to quash proceeding against petitioner on the strength of a settlement reached between them. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel submits that there was some property dispute consequent to which the unfortunate incident occurred and that property dispute was settled even before death of the de facto complainant. Annexure-3 is the Legal Heirship Certificate CRL.M.C. No.789 of 2011 -: 2 :- which shows that petitioner and respondent 2 and 3 are the legal heirs of the de facto complainant. Section 320(4) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure enables the legal heirs to compound the offence on the death of de facto complainant. Hence respondents 2 and 3 are entitled to settle the case with the petitioner. 3. Annexure-4 is the joint petition submitted by petitioner and respondents 2 and 3. There, fact of settlement is stated. Learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 confirmed the settlement and authenticity of signature of respondents 2 and 3 in Annexure-4. In the circumstances stated above and considering the relationship between the parties I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.119 of 2008, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding in C.C. No.253 of 2008 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur against petitioner are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv