IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3495 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 405/06 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION CP.70/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMANGALAM .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: --------------------------------- 1. CHIKKU @ SHANOOP, 26 YEARS, S/O.ALIKOYA, CHEMMALASSERYMADAM PARAMBU THONICHIRAROAD, NADUVATTOM, N.BEPUR. 2. SHABAB.E., 22 YEARS, S/O.MOITHEEN KOYA, SHAMIS (H), NADUVATTOM, N.BEPUR. 3. RIJESH.V., 32 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN PUTHYA PURAYIL HOUSE PUTHIYANGADI PO., PUTHYANGADI PO., KOZHIKODE. 4. JASNA, 18 YEARS, CHEMMALASSERYMADAM PARAMBU, THONICHIRAROAD NADUVATTOM, N.BEPUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN SMT.K.PUSHPAVATHI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADDL. R3. SALIM T., S/O. P.K. ASSAIN AGED 46 YEARS, SANTHI, P.O. KARANTHUR KOZHIKODE 673 571. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON CRL.M.A. 6658/08 DT.25.11.08) 4. MUNNA @ TASBIR, S/O. HAMZA, AGED 26 YEARS JEENA MANZIL, NADUVATTOM, NORTH BEPUR, CALICUT. 5. SHAKEELA, W/O. ALI KOYA, AGED 44 YEARS CHEMMALASSERI MARAMPARAMPU, THONICHIRA, NADUVATTOM, NORTH BEPUR, CALICUT. 6. ABHIJEETH, S/O. ABDUL HAKKIM, AGED 28 YEARS CHEMMALASSERI MARAMPARAMPU THONICHIRA, NADUVATTAM, NORTH BEPUR, CALICUT. (ADDL.R4 TO 6 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON CRL.M.A. 367/09 DT. 28.1.2009) R1 & 2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A. SALIM SRI.K.M.FIROZ FOR ADDL.R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3495 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of January, 2009 O R D E R Petitioners 1 to 3 and additional respondents 4 to 6 face indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 366 r/w. 34 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. Committal proceedings has been registered. The order of committal has not been passed. 2. The crux of the allegations against accused 1 to 6 i.e. petitioners 1 to 3 and additional respondents 4 to 6 is that they kidnapped the 4th petitioner, a minor girl, who was in the custody of her father, Addl. third respondent. 3. The petitioners and Addl. third respondent have now appeared before court through their counsel to apprise the court of the fact that all outstanding disputes between the accused on the one hand and petitioner No.4 and Addl. 3rd respondent on the other have been settled. The 4th petitioner has now married the Crl.M.C.No. 3495 of 2008 2 first petitioner. They are leading a harmonious life. A child has been born in the wedlock. The marriage has been approved by all concerned, including the Addl. third respondent, i.e. the father of the girl. The petitioners and the additional third respondent now pray that all outstanding disputes having been settled and the additional third respondent and the 4th petitioner having compounded the offences allegedly committed there is no relevance or necessity for the prosecution now to continue. 4. Addl. third respondent, the defacto complainant, has filed an affidavit along with other petitioners (petitioners 1 and 2) to confirm that he has settled the disputes and compounded the offences. Counsel appears for additional third respondent. 5. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that this is an eminently fit case where the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), Nikil Merchant v. C.B.I. (2008 (3) KLT 769) and Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC) can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination Crl.M.C.No. 3495 of 2008 3 the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against petitioners 1 to 3 and additional respondents 4 to 6. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. b) C.P.70 of 2007 pending before the J.F.M.C. Kunnamangalam, in which petitioners 1 to 3 and additional respondents 4 to 6 are the accused, the third respondent/the defacto complainant and the 4th petitioner, the girl who was allegedly kidnapped, is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the accused persons and their sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) Judge tm