IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1056 of 2011() ------------------------------- SC.123/2005 of SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.11 --------------------------------------- SURESH AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNA PILLAI SHEEJA MANDIRATHIL, NADUVILAKKARA CHERRY, TRIKKOVILVATTOM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.L.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S):STATE --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. VINOD, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, MUKALUVILANALUTHUNDIL HOUSE, NADUVILAKKARA CHERRY, THRIKKOVILVATTOM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA R2 BY ADV. SRI.LOWEL CHERIAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs. THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1056 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 06th day of April, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is 11th accused in Crime No.327 of 1998 of Kottiyam Police Station and S.C.No.123 of 2005 of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kollam for offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323 and 324 r/w Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Petitioner request this Court to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached with the second respondent and in view of the acquittal of remaining accused for want of evidence. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel on either sides confirmed settlement and learned counsel for second respondent has further confirmed authenticity and genuineness of Annexure-C, affidavit of second respondent where it is stated that the case with the petitioner is settled and that he does not intend to proceed in the matter further. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted after getting instruction that petitioner and second respondent have settled Crl.M.C.No.1056 of 2011 -: 2 :- the dispute. 3. It is seen from Annexure-B, judgment in S.C.No.123 of 2005 that accused 1 to 10 and 12 were acquitted for want of evidence under Sec.232 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. All the non official witnesses including PW4, the victim (respondent No.2 herein) refused to support the prosecution. In view of that and the settlement reached with petitioner and second respondent, continuance of proceeding is only a wasteful exercise. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.327 of 1998 of Kottiyam Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against petitioner/accused No.11 in S.C.No.123 of 2005 of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Kollam are quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-