IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3353 of 2010() ------------------------------------- CC.704/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ERATTUPETTA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. V.A.THOMAS, S/O.AVIRAH, AGED 73 YEARS, VADAKEDATH VEETILL.MATTOM, MELUKAVU, KOTTAYAM. 2. JOSEPH @ JOBY, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 32 YEARS, VADAKEDATH VEETILL.MATTOM, MELUKAVU, KOTTAYAM. 3. MATHEW @ BIJO, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 30 YEARS, VADAKEDATH VEETILL.MATTOM, MELUKAVU, KOTTAYAM. 4. SAJAN JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 37 YEARS, ALAKKALATHIL, ERATTUPETTA. 5. PRASAD, S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 39 YEARS, BUDHANAKUZHIVEETILL, CHAMBAKARA, KARUKACHAL, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN RESPONDENT(S): STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & INJURED ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MELUKAVU POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. JOSEPH, S/O.AVIRAH, VADAKKEDATH VEETILL.MATTOM, MELUKAVU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R2 BY ADVS. SRI.WILSON URMESE, SRI.K.M.SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3353 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 28th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.704/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Erattupetta taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 380, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. First petitioner and second respondent are brothers. Petitioners 2 and 3 are children of the first petitioner. Petitioners 4 and 5 are alleged to be the friends of petitioners 2 and 3. Prosecution case is that property originally belonged to the father of the first petitioner and second respondent. The petitioners in furtherance of their common intention committed theft of the Crmc 3353/10 2 title deed in respect of 5.60 Ares of property in R.S.No.569/6 of Kadanad Village and thereafter transferred the said property by a fraudulent document and thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire disputes with the first respondent were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that the petitioners are his brother, sons and their friends and all the disputes were subsequently settled amicably between them and due to the intervention of the mediators and the family Crmc 3353/10 3 members and therefore, has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners 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. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the statement of the second respondent recorded subsequently reveals that entire disputes were settled. 4. As is clear from the final report, the real disputes between first petitioner and first respondent is in respect of the property, left behind by their deceased father. Allegation is that the title deeds of the property was stolen by the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention and thereafter transferred the same by a fraudulent document. Offences alleged are Crmc 3353/10 4 purely personal in nature against the petitioners. The affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that he has settled entire disputes with the petitioners. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) and Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC))when offences are purely personal in nature and are settled amicably between the petitioners and second respondent, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.704/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Erattupetta is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.