IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2011 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 782 of 2011() ---------------------------------- CRIME NO.97/2009 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION. ..... PETITIONER(S): /ACCUSED ---------------------------------------- BIJIL,S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KADAYARA VEEDU, PIRAYUMOODU,NEYYATTINKARA BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): STATE 7 DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM 2. DINIL KUMAR, S/O.THANKAPPAN, T.S.BHAVAN, KUTHIRAPANTHY,PIRAYUMMOODU,NEYYATTINKARA P.O., KADAVATTARAM DESOM,NEYYATTINKARA- 695 121. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN R2 BY ADVS. SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.V.VIJULAL THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss P. Q. BARKATH ALI, J. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Crl.M.C. No. 782 of 2011 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 17th day of May, 2011 O R D E R This is a petition filed by the first accused in Crime No.97/2009 of Neyyattinkara Police Station to quash Annexure-I F.I.R. and all further proceedings pursuant thereto, as the matter has been settled between the parties. 2. The allegation against the petitioner/first accused was that on February 11, 2009 at about 8.15 p.m. he along with the second accused attacked the de facto complainant and caused injuries to him and thereby accused 1 and 2 committed offences punishable under sections 341, 324 and 308 read with section 34 IPC. 3. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner and second respondent/de facto complainant are neighbours and they have settled the matter and that Annexure-I F.I.R. and all further proceedings connected therewith, may be quashed. CRMC 782/2011 2 4. Notice given to the P.P. Adv. Sri.Saijo Hassan appears for the second respondent/de facto complainant. He has also submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties. An affidavit sworn to by the second respondent in this regard is produced as Annexure-IV in this petition. 5. The Apex Court has held in B.S. Joshi V. State of Haryana (2003(2) KLT 1062 (SC)) and also in Madan Mohan Abbot V. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC)) that though the offences alleged against the petitioner were non- compoundable and if the parties had settled the matter and it was not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, the entire proceedings can be quashed, exercising the powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. In the present case the petitioner has settled the matter with the second respondent/de facto complainant. Out of the offenses alleged against the petitioner and second accused, the offence punishable under section 308 is non- compoundable. The offences punishable under sections 341 CRMC 782/2011 3 and 324 are compounded. Therefore no useful purpose will be served in keeping the case pending. In the light of the principles laid down in the above decision and in the light of Annxure-IV affidavit filed by the second respondent, I feel that the entire proceedings in Annexure-I F.I.R. can be quashed. 6. In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-I F.I.R. which relates to Crime No.97/2009 of Neyyattinkara Police Station and all further proceedings connected therewith are hereby quashed. P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE . mn.