IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4063 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.96/2000 of ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM .................... (CRIME NO.123/09 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) PETITIONER(S): FOURTH ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------------- ANILKUMAR @ ANI, S/O. GOVINDAN, TC 19/99, PARAVILAKOM VEEDU, THRIKANNAPURAM, THIRUMALA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.B.HARISH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. VIJAYAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. APPU ASARI, TC 18/572, BHANUMATHI BHAVAN, PUNNACKAMUGAL, THIRUMALA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. MR.BOBY JOSEPH R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.4063 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 11th January 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the fourth accused in C.C.96/2000 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate court, Thiruvananthapuram. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings as against the petitioner contending that entire disputes with first respondent, the injured, has been settled amicably and the case as against second accused was already quashed by this court as per order dated 31/3/2009 in Crl.M.C.1156/2009 and by Annexure-A3 judgment, accused 1,3,5,7 and 8 were acquitted and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the Crmc 4063/09 2 prosecution. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that as the disputes were settled amicably, he has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Prosecution case is that on 14/7/1999 at about 6 p.m eight accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object voluntarily causing hurt to the first respondent and in furtherance of the common object, caused hurt to first respondent and thereby committed offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 323, 506(ii) read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-A3 judgment shows that as accused 2,4 and 6 were Crmc 4063/09 3 absconding, case as against them was split up and accused 1,3,5,7 and 8 were found not guilty and acquitted. By order in Crl.M.C.1156/2009 taking note of the order of acquittal and failure to identify the accused and also taking note of the settlement, case as against the second accused was quashed. 5. Affidavit filed by first respondent, the injured, establishes that there was a settlement of all the disputes with the petitioner. Annexure-A3 judgment itself shows that when he was examined as PW1, he turned hostile consequent to the settlement. In such circumstances, no purpose will be served by directing the petitioner to undergo the ordeal of a trial. It would only result in unnecessary waste of valuable time of the court. Hence, it is not in the interest of justice to continue Crmc 4063/09 4 the prosecution. Petition is allowed. L.P.37/2009, originally C.C.56/2008, which is the split up case of C.C.96/2000 on the file of additional Chief Judicial Magistrate court, Thiruvananthapuram as against the petitioner is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.