IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2011 / 11TH MAGHA 1932 CRL.MC.NO. 182 OF 2011() -------------------------------------- CC.697/2005 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 3 & 4 ---------------------------------------------- 1. PRAVEEN P.K. AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, PARAYAMUTTAM HOUSE, KULATHOOR VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. BALAMURALI R.S. AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.RAVEENDRAN NAIR,MURALEEVARAM OOROOTTUKALA, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.M.R.DHANIL RESPONDENT(S): STATE ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUATOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SAYYED ALI KHAN K.H. S/O. K.A. HASSAN, AGED 26 YEARS, KALLAPPARAMB HOUSE, 20TH MILE, CHERAKKAVU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DIST. ADV. SRI.JOHNSON BENNET FOR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.182 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 31st day of January, 2011 O R D E R Petitioners are accused Nos.3 and 4 in Crime No.351 of 2005 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. They, along with others were charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Case is that on 13.10.2005 at about 9.30 p.m. petitioners and others formed an unlawful assembly and attacked respondent No.2 with a brick and thereby committed offences as alleged. Case against petitioners is pending in the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thiruvananthapuram as C.C. No.697 of 2005. Petitioners request this Court to quash proceedings against them in view of settlement reached by them and respondent No.2 – de facto complainant. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions submitted that the parties have settled the dispute. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioners and it is not disputed by respondent No.2 also that case against accused Nos.1, 5 and 7 was quashed by this Court as per Crl. M.C. No.2737 CRL.M.C. No. 182 of 2011 -: 2 :- of 2009. It is seen from Annexure-A2, compounding petition signed by petitioners, respondent No.2 and their counsel that the matter is settled between the parties. Learned counsel submitted that petitioners were studying in Law College Thiruvananthapuram during the relevant time and that petitioners and respondent No.2 are now practicing Advocates at different places. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account the fact that there is no possibility of the prosecution having a successful culmination I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure-A1 final report, cognizance taken against petitioners and further proceedings in C.C. No.697 of 2005 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thiruvananthapuram to the extent it concerned petitioners are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv