IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2009 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1809 of 2009() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN L.P 153/2001 IN CC.255/1998 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- PRAKASH, S/O.SOMANATHAN, AISHWARYA, KAMUKINKODU, ATHIYANOOR PANCHAYAT, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. BY ADV. MR.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. VIMAL KUMAR, S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, (CW1), T.C.26/1618, PRESS ROAD, PULIMOODU, SECRETARIAT, THYCADU VILLAGE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI R2 BY ADV.MR. VINOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.1809 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 5th June 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.255/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thiruvananthapuram now pending as L.P.153/2001 on the failure of petitioner to appear. Annexure-A final report shows that the offence alleged is under Section 324 and 506(ii) of Indian Penal Code and it is purely of personal nature and committed against second respondent/complainant. The dispute between the petitioner and second respondent was subsequently settled between them. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings consequent to settlement. 2. As the offence under Section 506(ii), which is punishable for imprisonment which may be extended to seven years, is not compoundable this petition is filed to quash the proceedings. 3. Second respondent appeared through a CRMC 1809/09 2 counsel. He has filed an affidavit stating that his dispute with the petitioner has already been settled and at present there is no dispute and no public policy is effected by the settlement and he does not want to continue with the prosecution. Learned counsel appearing for second respondent also submitted that the matter has been settled and second petitioner is not intending to proceed with the case. 4. In such circumstances, when the offence alleged against the petitioner is purely of personal nature and the matter has been settled between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to proceed with the trial and thereby unnecessarily waste the valuable time of the court, when the prospect of a successful prosecution is almost bleak. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. C.C.255/1998 now pending as L.P.153/2001 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj. CRMC 1809/09 3