IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2011 / 5TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 130 of 2011() ----------------------------- (C.C. NO. 1051/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT) ........ PETITIONER(S):3RD ACCUSED ------------------------------------ AJAYAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN NAIR KINARUVILAYIL (H) KANNANAMKUZHIMURI, THAMARAKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SMT.REVATHY P. NAIR RESPONDENT(S):STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THOMAS CHACKO, S/O.CHACKO LAIJU VILLA, KANNANAMKUZHIMURI, THAMARAKULAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA PO ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.SUNIL JOSEPH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.130 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 25th day of January, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.148 of 1998 of Vallikunnu Police Station for offences punishable under Secs. 341, 324, 294(b) and 506(ii) r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. Case is that on 26.08.1998 at about 6 p.m petitioner and accused Nos.1 and 2 wrongfully restrained respondent No.2, the de facto complainant, voluntarily caused hurt to him, used obscene words at him and thereby committed offences as alleged. Accused Nos.1 and 2 faced trial in C.C.No.1036 of 1998 of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mavelikkara, the matter was settled between the parties and they were acquitted. Since petitioner was abroad he could not take part in the trial of that case and hence the case against him was split up and refiled as C.C.No.1051 of 2010 of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kayamkulam (on account of change in the jurisdiction of the Police Station concerned). Petitioner states that he has settled the matter with respondent No.2 and in the circumstances request that the proceedings against him may be quashed. Crl.M.C.No.130 of 2011 -: 2 :- 2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has submitted that the matter is settled between the parties. 3. It is seen from Annexure-A2, affidavit that petitioner and respondent No.2 have settled the dispute among them. It is stated that offence is purely personal between petitioner and respondent No.2. The success of prosecution largely depends on the evidence that respondent No.2 is to give. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.148 of 1998 of Vallikunnu Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and all further proceedings in C.C.No.1051 of 2010 of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kayamkulam against the petitioner are quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-