IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1635 of 2008() ------------------------- SC.62/2007 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, VADAKARA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- 1. KUNHAMMED, S/O.ABDULLA, OTHAYATHTHAZHAKUNIYIL VEEDU, THOONERI AMSOM, THOONERI DESOM. 2. MOIDU, S/O.MUNHALI, KANACHERI VEEDU, THOONERI AMSOM, THOONERI DESOM. 3. ILLIAS, S/O.MOIDU, THAYYULLATHIL HOUSE, THOONERI AMSOM, THOONERI DESOM. 4. HARIS, S/O.KUTTIALI, MUKRREENTAVIDE (H), THOONERI AMSOM, THOONERI DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.P.M.RAFIQ RESPONDENTS: DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------------------ 1. KUNJI UNAKKAN, S/O.CHATHU, KIZHAKKA THARAMMEL HOUSE, THUNJERI AMSOM, THUNJERI DESOM, VADAKARA TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE SRI.M.MUHAMMAD SHAFI FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.1635 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008 ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 to 3 and 6 in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 427 r/w 149 I.P.C and also Section 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act. Altogether there are 6 accused persons. The allegations against the accused person is that on account of political animosity they were members of an unlawful assembly who indulged in wanton acts of mischief leading to destruction of the residence of the defacto complainant. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The petitioners were not available for trial. The other co-accused who faced trial have already been found not guilty and acquitted as per judgment dated 13.12.06 in S.C.189 of 2004, copy of which is produced as Annexure-B. In that prosecution also none of the witnesses supported the prosecution holding that there is “not a shred of incriminating evidence in the deposition of the witnesses” the co-accused were acquitted. Even the questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C was dispensed with and the case was disposed of at the stage of Section 232 Cr.P.C. 2. The petitioners who were not available before court for trial have now come before this Court along with the defacto Crl.M.C. No.1635 of 2008 2 complainant/CW1 to report to the court that all the outstanding disputes have been settled and the 1st respondent who had suffered on account of the alleged mischief has no surviving grievance against the petitioners herein also. It is prayed that the composition may be accepted notwithstanding the fact that the offence under Section 143 I.P.C and other connected offences under Sections 147 and 148 I.P.C as also the offences under Explosive Substances Act and are not compoundable. 3. I have perused the judgment in the case where the co- accused stood trial. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar. I have perused the affidavit Annexure-C filed by the 1st respondent. ie. the defacto complainant. I am satisfied from the totality of facts and circumstances that there has been a harmonious settlement of the disputes between the parties. The settlement/composition which appears to me to be voluntary and genuine can certainly be accepted if the same is legally possible and permissible. Some of the offences are non compoundable. In these circumstances, the counsel pray that the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 A.I.R SCW 2287] may be pressed into service and consequently powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked to bring to premature termination the Crl.M.C. No.1635 of 2008 3 unnecessary and nonproductive continuation of the surviving proceedings against the petitioners. 4. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits that the State has no objection in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case in the proceedings being burried without further continuance. 5. I am satisfied, on a consideration of all the relevant inputs, that this is an eminently fit case where powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C ,as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, can safely be pressed into service to bring to premature termination the surviving prosecution against the petitioners. 6. In the result: i) This Crl.M.C is, allowed; ii) S.C.No.62 of 2007 pending before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Vadakara against the petitioners is hereby quashed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C. No.1635 of 2008 4