IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 30TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 473 of 2010 --------------------------------- [SC.NO.127/2007 OF ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), KOLLAM] .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- SREEJITH S., S/O. SREEDHARAN PILLAI, 'SREE NILAYAM", ERATHU VADAKKU, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.MANOJ RAMASWAMY. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS: ------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SASIDHARAN PILLAI, S/O. SANKARAN NAIR, CHALUVILLA VADAKKETHIL PUTHENVEEDU, CHELIKUZHI, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. SREEJA.S., W/O. SREEJITH S., "SREE NILAYAM", ERATHU VADAKKU, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A.SALIM, R2 & R3 BY ADV. SMT.MERIL MUTHU P.JOHN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.473 OF 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused in S.C.No.127/2007 on the file of Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-I), Kollam, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 366A of Indian Penal Code. Under Annexure- A1 FIR, the case was registered under the caption 'man missing', after recording the statement of the second respondent, the defacto complainant, alleging that his minor daughter is missing. After investigation, charge was submitted alleging that petitioner abducted her and thus, committed an offence under Section 366A of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes between the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 were settled amicably and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the CRMC 473/10 2 prosecution. 2. Respondents 2 and 3, along with the petitioner, filed Crl.M.Appl.No.693/2010 stating that entire disputes between the parties were settled amicably and respondents 2 and 3 have no subsisting grievance against the petitioner and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Annexure-A3 certificate issued by Ambika Vilasam N.S.S. Karayogam is also produced to prove that petitioner subsequently married the third respondent. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. The final report, taken cognizance by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, with the joint statement filed by the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3, establish that the offence alleged against the petitioner is purely personal in nature as against respondents 2 and 3. The allegation itself CRMC 473/10 3 is that petitioner abducted third respondent. It is now clear that petitioner has subsequently married the third respondent and second respondent, the defacto complainant, has also agreed to the marriage. In the light of these developments, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, as, in view of the settlement, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution and trial would result only in wasting the valuable time of the court. Petition is allowed. S.C.No.127/2007 on the file of Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-I), Kollam is quashed. 19th February, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv