IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2010 / 15TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2426 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.1687/2005 of ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- C.K.JOHNY, S/O.KUNCHERIA, AGED 53 YEARS, MANAGER, YOUNG BROTHERS, NEAR ST.GEORGE CHURCH, EDAPPALLY, RESIDING AT CHERUSSERIL HOUSE, NEDUMKUNNAM VILLAGE, CHENGANASSERY TALUK, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. SARALADEVI, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.JAYARAJ, 27/72, TEJUS, CHAKKALAMOOD JUNCTION, NADAMA VILLAGE, TRIPUNITHURA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.PAUL JACOB FOR R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.2426 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July, 2010 ORDER Petitioner, who is the sole accused in Crime No.143/2005 of Panangad Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(i), 323 and 354 IPC and now pending before the A.C.J.M Court, Ernakulam as C.C.No.1687/2005, seeks to quash all proceedings on the ground that the matter has been settled between the de facto complainant and the petitioner. An affidavit of the de facto complainant has also been filed (Annexure A2) to the effect that she has settled the dispute with the petitioner and that she has no more grievance in the matter nor has she any objection in dropping the proceedings. The said affidavit can be treated as a composition of the offences other than the one punishable under Section 294(b) IPC, which is a non-compoundable offence. Accordingly, composition of the offences punishable under Sections 506(i), 323 and 354 IPC is recorded and it will have the fact of discharging the petitioner of all those offences. Crl.M.C. No.2426 of 2010 : 2 : 2. The only surviving offence is one punishable under Section 294(b) which is a non-compoundable offence. Going by the averments in the final report, there is no statement to the effect that on the accused calling the complainant obscene words the complainant got sexually impure thoughts which is an inevitable concomitant of the offence punishable under Section 294(b) IPC (Preethimon and another v. State of Kerala 2008 (1) KHC 330 and P.T.Chacko v. Nainan Chacko 1967 KLT 799.) Hence the offence punishable under Section 294(b) is not made out by the prosecution records. Therefore the said offences have no legs to stand on. Accordingly, the petitioner accused will stand discharge of the said offence as well. 3. The result of the foregoing discussion is that C.C.No.1681/2005 pending before the A.C.J.M Court, Ernakulam if allowed to proceed with, will be an abuse of the process of the court and the same shall accordingly stand quashed. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE dmb