IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 28 of 2011() ----------------------- CRIME NO.806/2010 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S)ACCUSED: --------------- 1. PUTHUKUDI IBRAHIM ,S/O.KUNHAHAMMED AGED 20 YEARS, VADIPURAM KAVVAI, PAYYANNUR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DT. 2. LATHEEF, S/O.MOHAMMED,AGED 50 YEARS RESIDING AT VADIPURAM,KAVVAI, PAYYANNUR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DT. 3. ISMAIL K.P., S/O.AHAMMED KUNHI AGED 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT VADIPURAM,KAVVAI, PAYYANNUR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DT. 4. KABEER, S/O.HUSSAIN, AGED 35 YEARS RESIDING AT VADIPURAM,KAVVAI, PAYYANNUR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: --------------- 1. ABDUL JABBAR, S/O.HUSSAIN, AGED 40 YEARS RESIDING AT KAVVAI,VADEPPURAM PAYYANNUR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DT-670141. 2. THE S.H.O., TALIPARAMBA TALUK,KANNUR DT REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.GEORGIE SIMON FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.28 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 to 4 in Crime No.806 of 2010 of Payyannur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341 and 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the Code”). Prosecution case is that on 04.12.2010 at about 2 p.m. on account of previous enmity, petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, committed rioting armed with deadly weapons such as iron rod and reapers wrongfully restrained and voluntarily caused grievous hurt to respondent No.1/defacto complainant. It is alleged that petitioners assaulted respondent No.1 alleging that the latter harassed the father of petitioner No.1. Prayer in this petition is to quash the proceedings against petitioners in view of the settlement between them and respondent No.1. 2. Respondent No.1 appears through Advocate George Simon. Respondent No.1 has sworn an affidavit stating that the matter is settled outside court and that he does not intend to proceed against petitioners further. He also stated that the decision was not due to any compulsion from any part. He says that the real culprits are not proceeded against and that petitioners only helped him to get admitted in the hospital after the incident. Crl.MC No.28/2011 2 3. It is true that offences alleged to have been committed by petitioners involved offence under Section 326 of the Code also but the offence is purely personal to and between petitioners and respondent No.1. Success of the prosecution case depends on the evidence respondent No.1 is to give. In the light of the affidavit sworn by respondent No.1 the chance of prosecution succeeding in this case is bleak. Moreover parties have settled their dispute. In the circumstances I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed and all proceedings in Crime No.806 of 2010 of Payyannur Police Station against petitioners is quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks