IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2010 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4531 of 2010() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 638/2010 OF ANTHIKKAD POLICE STATION ................................. PETITIONERS / A1 TO A5 : ------------------------------------- 1. SALAHUDHIN, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMADALI, PAMBENEZHATH (HOUSE), PALLYARATHODE, EDASSERY, THALIKKULAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR (DISTRICT). 2. ASHIF A.M., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMADALI, ARAKKAVEETTIL (HOUSE), (PO) VADANAPPALLY, THRISSUR (DISTRICT). 3. ANZAR C.A., AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.ALIMON, CHALIL (HOUSE), (PO) VADANAPPALLY, THRISSUR (DISTRICT). 4. PRADEEP, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN, KOZHIKODE (HOUSE), (PO) EDASSERY, EDASSERY DESOM, THALIKKULAM VILLAGE. 5. LANEESH, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.KESAVAN, MONGADI (HOUSE), (PO) EDASSERY, EDASSERY DESOM, THALIKKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS / COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. JOY, S/O.POULOSE, CHERANELLURKARAN MADASSERY (HOUSE) KARIKKODI DESOM, KARAMUKKU VILLAGE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM R2 BY ADV. SRI.E.C.BINEESH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4531 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 13th December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in Crime No.638/2010 of Anthikkad Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 323, 324, 308 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-I FIR. Second respondent is the de facto complainant and the injured. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared Crmc 4531/10 2 through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire disputes were settled with the petitioners due to the intervention of mediators and consequent to the settlement, he has no objection for releasing the petitioners on bail or to quash the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. The case was registered based on the first information statement of the second respondent, which reveals that on 27/8/2010 at about 6.50 a.m, he was attacked by the petitioners who came there in a red coloured car and thereafter, inflicted hurt with a knife. The offence under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code is allegedly committed, based on the allegation that if second respondent has not evaded, when the knife was aimed at his neck, Crmc 4531/10 3 death would have been caused. The offence alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature against the second respondent. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that he has settled all the disputes with the petitioners. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC), when the offences alleged are purely personal in nature against the second respondent and second respondent has settled all the disputes with the petitioners, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. Crime No.638/2010 of Anthikkad Police Station and further proceedings are quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.