IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4456 of 2010(N) -------------------------------------- ( CRIME NO. 200/1990 OF HILL POLICE STATION, IN CC.122/2004 OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- N.V.VARGHESE AGED 54, S/O.VARGHESE NADUVILA MULLOTH KAPPATTI, UDAYAMPEROOR, MANAKUNNAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.UDAYABHANU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. JOY JOSEPH AGED 57, S/O.JOSEPH, KIDANGETHU HOUSE UDYAMPEROOR, MANAKUNNAM VILLAGE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I.OF POLICE, HILL PALACE POLICE STATION CRIME 200/90 REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.BOBAN PALAT R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4456 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 30th November, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and first respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.122/2004 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 468 and 420 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-I final report. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with the first respondent, de facto complainant. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that he has settled all the disputes Crmc 4456/10 2 with the petitioner and he has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner and therefore, the case may be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) when the offences alleged against the petitioner are purely personal in nature against the first respondent and first respondent has amicably settled all the disputes with the petitioner, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, especially when consequent to the settlement, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution and the trial would only result in unnecessary waste of valuable time of Crmc 4456/10 3 the court. Affidavit filed by the first respondent establishes that he has settled all the disputes with the petitioner. Hence, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.122/2004 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj. Crmc 4456/10 4