IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2010 / 9TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 232 of 2010() ------------------------ CC.854/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KASARAGOD CRIME NO. 65 OF 2006 OF BEDAKAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.2 -------------------------------------------- N.RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, PILATHARA.P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED AND STATE ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA (THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BEDAKAM POLICE STATION CRIME NO.65/2006), REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SMT.ANIT JOSEPH, D/O.M.J.JOSEPH, KANNEEZHATH BABU HOUSE, P.O.SHANKARAMPADY, PADAPPU, KARIVEDAKAM VILLAGE, KASARGODE DISTRICT. (NOW WORKING AS THE MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE, MANNARKKAD). R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 232 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2010. ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to have all further proceedngs in C.C.854 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kasaragod quashed including the charge sheet. 2. Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.65 of 2006 of Bedakam Police Station for having committed offences punishable under Sections 414, 467, 468, 471 and 474 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code. After investigation, final report was laid before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kasaragod. The said court took cognizance of the offence as C.C.854 of 2008. 3. It is pointed out that the petitioner is the complainant in S.T. 1863 of 2005 on the file of JFCM, Taliparamba for the offence punishable under Section Crl.M.C.232/2010. 2 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The allegation was that the second respondent herein had owed a sum of Rs.One Lakh to him and the second respondent issued a cheque in favour of the petitioner. On presentation, the cheque was returned with the endorsement 'funds insufficient'. After complying with the legal formalities, the petitioner filed a complaint, which was taken on file as S.T.1863 of 2005. The present complaint against him is a counter blast to the said proceedings and there is no basis for the allegations made in the complaint. 4. It is unnecessary to go deep into the matter for the simple reason that a petition has been filed by the parties stating that they had settled the dispute between them and they have no further grievance in the matter. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor also points out that the statements of the persons have been taken by the Sub Inspector concerned. 6. It seems that the parties have amicably settled the differences between them. Though the offences are not Crl.M.C.232/2010. 3 compoundable, in the light of the fact that the parties have buried the disputes between them and in the light of the decisions reported in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008(3) KLT 19(SC)] and Manoj Sharma v. State [2008 (4)KLT 417 (SC)], it is only appropriate that the proceedings be quashed. In the result, this petition is allowed, all further proceedings in C.C. No.854 of 2008 pending before the JFCM, Kasaragod shall stand quashed and all further proceedings dropped. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.