IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1707 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.81 OF 2007 OF THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ------------ MANAKKAL HAMEEDALI, S/O.MAMMADALI, AROOR, P.O.OLAVATTOOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.1707 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 354 I.P.C. He allegedly has committed the offence against three girl students. He submits that the said three girl students have now realised the futility and the irrelevance of prosecuting the case against the petitioner. They were prevailed upon on account of political reasons to make such incorrect allegations. Be that as it may, they have now realised their fault and they are willing to compound the offence allegedly committed against them. In these circumstances, the petitioner has come to this Court with a prayer that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked to quash the proceedings. 2. In the nature of the facts and circumstances of this case, it is for the alleged victims to report to the learned Magistrate that they have settled the disputes and compounded the alleged offence committed by the petitioner herein. If such an application is filed, needless to say, the learned Magistrate must consider the same in the light of the decision in Baiju v. State of Kerala [2007(4) KLT 1082]. I have no reason to assume that the Crl.M.C. No.1707 of 2008 2 learned Magistrate shall not dispose of such application for composition under Section 320 Cr.P.C in accordance with law, on merits and expeditiously. 3. The relief could clearly have been obtained from the learned Magistrate. I think it is unnecessary, and nay would be laying down an unhealthy and incorrect procedure if this Court were to entertain a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C at this stage. In Baiju v. State of Kerala (supra) and in Yesudasan v. S.I of Police [2008(1) KLT 245], procedure of such composition has been referred to and explained. 4. It is now conceded that the final report has already been filed. The petitioner must ensure that appropriate application for composition is filed before the learned Magistrate to bring to premature termination the proceedings against him. The learned Magistrate must consider such application for composition under Section 320 Cr.P.C in the light of the two decisions referred above. 5. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C. No.1707 of 2008 3