IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2010 / 10TH JYAISTHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1090 of 2010() ------------------------------------- LPC.160/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR. CRIME NO.126/1995 OF PAYANGADI POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- ACHUMMANTAKATH SHAHUL HAMEED, S/O.MUHAMMED KUNHI, PUTHIYANGADI, MADAI P.O, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL, SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN. RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA-REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. K.P. MAHAMOOD HAJI, KALATHILE PURAYIL HOUSE, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, PUTHIYANGADI, P.O MADAYI, KANNUR. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U. NAZAR. R2 BY ADV. SRI.NISHIL.P.S. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1090 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2010 ORDER The petitioner who is the seventh accused in Crime No.126/95 of Payangadi Police Station and presently the fourth accused in L.P.C.No.160/2002 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class Court, Payyannur for offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of I.P.C. seeks to quash all further proceedings in the above case mainly for the reason that the matter has since been settled between the de facto complainant/injured and the petitioner as evidenced by Annexure -2 affidavit. The date of occurrence was 28/5/1995 at a time when the offence punishable under Section 324 I.P.C was compoundable. Three of the co-accused in the case have admittedly been acquitted in appeal. 2. The composition of the offences under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C. as between the de facto complainant and the petitioner is accepted and it will have to the effect of discharge of the accused of the said offence. 3. When the prosecution case is that the unlawful Crl.M.C.No.1090/2010 : 2 : assembly was formed for the purpose of committing offences punishable under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C and when the said offences have been compounded and the accused discharged, there cannot be any unlawful assembly and the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148 read with Section 149 I.P.C. cannot have any independent existence and the petitioner is discharged of the said offences as well. The Criminal M.C is allowed. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj