IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 479 of 2011() ----------------------------------- CC.315/2002 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, SASTHAMCOTTA CRIME NO.89/2002 OF SOORANAD POLICE STATION, NOW PENDING AS CC.1085/2008 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, SASTHAMCOTTA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 1 ------------------------------------------- SURESH, S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN PILLAI, KOCHUTHUNDIL VEETTIL, PULIKULAM MURI, SOORANAD NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, 682 031. 2. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.GANGADHARAN PILLAI, PULLUVELIL VEEDU, PULIKULAM MURI, SOORANAD NORTH VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 561. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.J. MOHEMMED ANZAR. R2 BY ADV. SRI.DILEEP P.PILLAI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No. 479 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is accused in Crime No.89 of 2002 of Sooranad Police Station and C.C. No.315 of 2002 (presently, C.C. No.1085 of 2008) of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sasthamcotta for offences punishable under Sections 447, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Case is that on 02.04.2002 petitioner and others trespassed into the courtyard of respondent No.2, and voluntarily caused hurt/grievous hurt to him with iron rod. Motive alleged is enmity due to respondent No.2 visiting the estranged wife of petitioner. Petitioner seeks to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached between the parties. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 confirmed settlement and respondent No.2 signing the application (Crl. M.A. No.1154 of 2011) signifying his consent to quash the proceeding. 2. It is not disputed that parties are closely related. Though offence under Sec.326 IPC is also involved, as parties are CRL.M.C. No.479 of 2011 -: 2 :- related, reason for the alleged attack is enmity which I have stated above and parties have settled the dispute between them I do not consider it necessary to continue the proceeding. Cordial relationship between the parties has to be maintained. There is also no possibility of proceeding having a successful culmination. Hence I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure-A, final report in Crime No.89 of 2002 of Sooranad police station, cognizance taken and proceeding in C.C. No.315 of 2002 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate (now pending as C.C. No.1085 of 2008) to the extent it concerned against petitioner are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv