IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3319 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.377/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II,NEYYATTINKARA CRIME NO.50/04 OF POOVAR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED 1 TO 3: --------------------------- 1. CELESTIN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.AMRITANAYAKAM, VARAVILATHOPPIL HOUSE, POOVAR, THIRUPURAM VILLAGE. 2. JOSEPH, AGED 36, S/O.PATHROSE, ERUKKALUVILA PURAYIDOM, POOVAR, THIRUPURAM VILLAGE. 3. BIJU, AGED 24, S/O.MARIADASAN, ERUKKALUVILA PURAYIDOM, POOVAR, THIRUPURAM VILLAGE BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANTS: -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING, THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOVAR POLICE STATION. 2. CRIPSON @ HEPSEN, AGED 26, S/O.MARIADASAN, ERUKKALUVILA PURAYIDOM, POOVAR, THIRUPURAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.V.GOPIKRISHNA FOR R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3319 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of September 2008 O R D E R The petitioners who face indictment for offences punishable inter alia under Sections 294(a), 341 and 324 read with 34 I.P.C have come before this court along with the de facto complainant/the second respondent herein to report to the court that the disputes between them have been settled and the second respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. The offence under Section 294(a) is not legally compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C and in these circumstances it is prayed that the composition may be accepted and invoking powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287] premature termination of the proceedings against the petitioners may be directed. 2. The second respondent has entered appearance through counsel. It is confirmed that the disputes have been settled and the offences alleged have been compounded by the second respondent. All the offences other than the offence punishable under Section 294 I.P.C are compoundable. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, does not oppose the said prayer. Crl.M.C.No.3319/08 2 3. I am satisfied from the submissions made at the Bar and from Annexure 2 affidavit filed by the second respondent that the parties have willingly and voluntarily settled their disputes. If legally permissible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted and premature termination of the proceedings can be brought about. But the offence under Section 294(a) I.P.C is not legally compoundable. The learned counsel, in these circumstances, rightly rely on the decision in Madan Mohan (Supra). That decision is authority for the proposition that in the interests of justice, in a fit case, composition for a non-compoundable offence can also be accepted to bring to premature termination the proceedings against the indictees. Section 294 I.P.C is alleged only because of intemperate language used in a private conversation. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C, as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra) can be pressed into service. 4. In the result, a) This petition is allowed. b) C.C No.377/04 pending before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Neyyattinkara against the petitioners is hereby quashed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3319/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.3319/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008