IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4170 of 2010() ------------------------- (CC.372/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRTE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THRISSUR) .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- PRAVEENKUMAR, S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY NAIR KAITHAKKAT HOUSE, CHALAKKUDY DESOM, WEST CHALAKKUDY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. SEBILLA, W/O.BABU, THAZHATH HOUSE THALAVANIKKARA DESOM, NENMANIKKARA VILLAGE THALORE PO. 680306, THRISSUR. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4170 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 7th day of December,2010 ORDER Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.372/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur taken cognizance for the offence under section 468 and 420 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A3 final report. Prosecution case is that in furtherance of the common intention to cheat first respondent, second accused made the first respondent to believe that petitioner is having right title and possession of 79 cents in R.S. No.440/1 and 1.21 acres in R.S.No.439/1 of Mulayam village and after receiving 1 lakh consideration executed and registered a sale deed in favour of the first respondent and thereby committed the offences. The petition is filed under Crl.M.C.4170/2010 2 section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with the first respondent. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that due to the intervention of mediators, entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement she has no grievance against the petitioner and therefore has no objection for quashing the proceedings. Affidavit also disclose that she has settled not only the case against the petitioner but the other accused also. 3. Annexure A3 final report discloses that the offences alleged against the accused are purely personal in nature against the first respondent. Prosecution case is that on 16.2.1999 in furtherance of the common intention to cheat first respondent, making her believe that petitioner has right title and possession over two acres of land, executed a sale deed in her favour, receiving a consideration of Rs.1,00,000/- and thereby cheated Crl.M.C.4170/2010 3 them. The affidavit filed by the first respondent establishes that she has settled all the disputes with the accused. In the light of the prosecution case, an offence under section 468 will not be attracted as there is no case for the prosecution that petitioner executed the registered sale deed either as somebody else or as authorised by somebody else. In such circumstances, when an offence under section 420 of Indian Penal Code is compoundable and it is settled, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.372/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thrissur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006