IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 855 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CC.646/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, NORTH PARAVUR CRIME NO.150/2009 OF BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- JAMAL, AGED 45, S/O.ABDULLAKUTTY, VAZHAPPILLY VEETTIL, PANAYIKULAM KARA, ALANGAD VIA., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.A.IBRAHIM RESPONDENTS/STATE AND COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION (CRIME NO.150/2009), BINANIPURAM, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. TOMY, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.POULOSE, THOTTAKKATTU VEETTIL, PANAYIKULAM KARA, ALANGAD VIA., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.S. SIVAKUMAR. R2 BY ADV. MR.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA). THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.855 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 31st March 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant, who is also the injured in C.C.646/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, North Paravur taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 448, 323 and 294(b) of Indian Penal Code. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire disputes were settled amicably between petitioner and second respondent and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Crmc 855/10 2 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that the incident occurred at 3.30 p.m on 21/3/2009 when petitioner was under the influence of liquor and subsequently due to the intervention of friends, entire disputes were settled and he and the petitioner are living as friends and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Prosecution case is that on 21/3/2009 at about 3.30 p.m petitioner trespassed into the residential house of the second respondent and caused hurt after scolding using abusive language and thereby committed the offences. Offences alleged are Crmc 855/10 3 purely personal in nature as against the second respondent. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that entire disputes were settled amicably. 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 and disputes were settled amicably between petitioner and second respondent, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.646/2009 on the Judicial First Class Magistrate, North Paravur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.