IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2010 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1207 of 2010 ---------------------------------- [CC.NO.172/2009 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR] .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ 1. SAFWAN K.P., S/O. ABDUL KHADER, AGED 28 YEARS, KULAPURAYIL HOUSE, MATTOOL AMSOM, MATTOOL NORTH, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. K.C.RAFEEQ, S/O. ABOOBACKER, AGED 27 YEARS, KUNNARUVATH CHALIL HOUSE, MATTOOL AMSOM, MATTOOL NORTH, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.B.PREMNATH. RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND INJURED (PW1 TO PW5): ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PAYANGADI POLICE STATION, (REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM). 2. PUTHUKKAN RAJEEVAN, S/O. KANNAN, AGED 38 YEARS, MATTUL AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. MANOHARAN, S/O. MICHAEL, AGED 41 YEARS, MATTUL AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. LAKSHMANAN, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN,AGED 47 YEARS, MATTUL AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. PUTHUKKAN SURESH, S/O. BALAN, AGED 32, MATTUL AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. CRL.M.C. NO. 1207/2010: 6. VINAYAKUMAR, S/O. SREEDHARAN, AGED 33 YEARS, MATTUL AMSOM, KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. I.B. PRAMOD, R2 TO R6 BY ADV. MR.E.NARAYANAN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1207 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners were accused 2 and 4 in C.C.No. 373/2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that on 15.11.2002 at about 11.30 p.m., the five accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object beat respondents 2 to 6 and caused hurt and grievous hurt and all the accused, thereby, committed the offences. As petitioners were absconding, the case as against them was split up and refiled as C.C.No.790/2007 and accused 1, 3 and 5 were tried. By Annexure-VII judgment, learned Magistrate acquitted those accused finding that the injured as well as the eye witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution and there is no evidence in CRMC 1207/10 2 support of the prosecution case. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that when the co-accused were tied, the witnesses did not support the prosecution case, evidenced by Annexures-II to VI copies of their depositions and entire disputes with respondents 2 to 6 were settled amicably and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Respondents 2 to 6 appeared through a counsel and filed a joint petition along with the petitioners stating that entire disputes with the petitioners were settled amicably and consequently, the case is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, respondents 2 to 6 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Offences alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature. Annexure-VII judgment shows that when accused 1, 3 and 5 were tried by CRMC 1207/10 3 the learned Magistrate, respondents 2 to 6 did not support the prosecution case. Therefore, it is absolutely clear that even if petitioners are to be tried, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution. It is more so when the joint petition filed by respondents 2 to 6, along with the petitioners, establishes that entire disputes between them were settled amicably. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), when the disputes between the parties were settled amicably and the offences are purely personal in nature, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.172/2009 (C.C.No. 790/2007) on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur is quashed. 7th April, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv