IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2008 / 17TH ASHADHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2390 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.409/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ------------ ABDUL SALAM, 35 YEARS, S/O.SULAIMAN KANDATHIL VEETTIL, MADAI AMSOM MUTTOM, KANNUR BY ADV. SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE, PAYANGADI POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 2. S. ABDULLA, S/O. ASSAINAR, SAIDUMADATHU VEEDU, MUTTOM, MADAYI, P.O., PAYANGADI, KANUR DISTRICT. IS IMPLEASED AS THE ADDITIONAL 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED 8/7/2008 IN CRL.M.A.NO.3668/08. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB. SMT.K.G.SARALAKUTTY FOR (DE FACTO COMPLAINANT) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 2390 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008 ORDER The petitioner, along with the co-accused, faced indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.341 and 323 read with Sec.149 of the IPC. Altogether, there were 5 accused persons. All the co-accused who faced trial have been found not guilty and acquitted. The case against the petitioner has been split up. The substantive offences under Secs.341 and 323 of the IPC are compoundable. But inasmuch as the vicarious liability under Sec.149 of the IPC is alleged and the offences alleged include the offences punishable under Secs.143 and 147 IPC, composition by resort to the provisions of Sec.320 IPC is not possible. But the petitioner and the de facto complainant have settled their disputes. It is prayed that notwithstanding the fact that some Crl.M.C. No. 2390 of 2008 -: 2 :- of the ancillary and incidental offences are not compoundable, the composition may be accepted and further proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed. 2. The de facto complainant has entered appearance through counsel. A petition for composition has been filed. The application is duly signed by the de facto complainant as also the petitioner. The application is duly countersigned by their respective counsel. I am satisfied that the parties have settled their disputes voluntarily and genuinely. If legally permissible and possible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted and the proceedings against the petitioner can be brought to premature termination. 3. But the offences are non-compoundable under Sec.320. The learned counsel, in these circumstances, prays that the dictum in Madhan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 AIR SCW 2287) may be pressed into service and further proceedings may be quashed invoking the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. 4. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor confirms that the matter is settled between the parties and the State has no objection against invocation of the dictum in Madhan Mohan ( cited supra). Crl.M.C. No. 2390 of 2008 -: 3 :- 5. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where further wastage of time can be avoided and proceedings can be brought to premature termination as enabled by the dictum in Madhan Mohan. 6. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. (b) C.C.No.409/07 pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Payyannur, against the petitioner herein is hereby quashed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge