IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4744 of 2010() ------------------------- (L.P. 311/2008 IN C.C.421/2004 IN JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHENGANNUR IN CRIME NO. 14/2004 VENMONY POLICE STATION) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSSED-A1: -------------------------------------------- SHANI HASSAN, S/O.HASSAN RAVATHER, THAMPATHIL HOUSE, CHERUVALLOOR MURI, CHERYANADU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. MANOJ MENON, S/O.PARAMESHWARA MENON, AGED 40 YEARS, MANGALA PALLIL VEEDU CHERUVALLOOR MURI, CHERYANADU VILLAGE CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 688 001. R1 BY PUBLIC PROCECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.DILEEP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SMT THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4744 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 04th day of February, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No. 14 of 2004 of Venmony Police Station, C.C.No.421 of 2004 and L.P.No.311 of 2008 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate,, Chengannur for offence punishable under Sec.381 r/w Sec.34 of the Penal Code. Case is that on 18.02.2004 at about 10a.m petitioner committed theft of a motor cycle belonging to the second respondent. Petitioner seeks to quash proceedings against him on the strength of an affidavit submitted by the second respondent that the matter is settled between them. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor has confirmed fact of settlement between the parties. 2. It would appear that petitioner was an employee under the second respondent and at a time when the second respondent was abroad the latter had entrusted custody of the vehicle to the petitioner. It is that time theft allegedly occurred. Going by the affidavit of second respondent the matter has been settled between the parties. It is stated that he has received compensation from petitioner and that he does not want to Crl.M.C.No.4744 of 2010 -: 2 :- continue with the proceeding. In the circumstance, I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Annexure-A, final report in Crime No.14 of 2004 of Venmony Police Station, cognizance taken thereon in C.C.No.421 of 2004 and proceeding in L.P.No.311 of 2008 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chengannur to the extent it concerned petitioner/first accused will stand quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/- /True Copy/ P. A to Judge