IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4956 of 2010() -------------------------------------- (CC.776/2004 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURTII,ERNAKULAM) ....... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ K.L.IRANIMOSE, S/O. LEONS, AGED 61 YEARS, KADUVELIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENNUR, KOTHAD P.O., PIN - 682 027. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 31. 2. SAMYUKTHA L., D/O. DR.LAXMINARAYANA, AGED 28 YEARS, NO.49/2811A, SAMUDRA HOUSE, BEHIND PERANDOOR TEMPLE,ELAMAKKARA, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE,AT PRESENT RESIDING AT FLAT NO.404,"A" WING,"SAI SANGHATH", SECTOR-3, PLOT NO.4,SANPADA, NAVI MUMBAI, P.O. MAHARASHTRA-400 008. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MOHAMMED ANZAR R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4956 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 24th day of January, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.74 of 2004 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam and C.C.No.776 of 2004 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Ernakulam for offence punishable under Sec.354 of the Penal Code. Case is that on 29.12.2003 at about 10 a.m in the campus of the School of Industrial Fisheries, Ernakulam petitioner outraged the modesty of respondent No.2. Police after investigation submitted final report alleging commission of offences as above stated, on which learned Magistrate took cognizance and filed C.C.No.776 of 2004. Respondent No.2, the de facto complainant is working at Bombay. Annexure-R2(a) is the notarized affidavit of respondent No.2 which states that the matter has been settled between her and petitioner out side court and that she does not want to proceed against petitioner. It is also stated in the affidavit that respondent No.2 has given her consent to compound the case and that the affidavit is being sworn of her own free will and pleasure. 2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Crl.M.C.No.4956 of 2010 -: 2 :- Prosecutor after getting instruction has confirmed fact of settlement between petitioner and respondent No.2. 3. Respondent No.2 is now working at Bombay and in her affidavit has stated that she has settled the matter with the petitioner. Much of success of prosecution depends on the evidence of respondent No.2 is to give. Now that the matter has been settled between the parties, it is purely personal between petitioner and respondent No.2 and considering the settlement the parties have reached I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed and Annexure-A2, final report in Crime No.74 of 2004 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, the cognizance taken thereon and proceedings in C.C.No.776 of 2004 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Ernakulam against the petitioner are quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-