IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2011 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3506 of 2010(C) -------------------------------------- [CC.NO.113/2009 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THODUPUZHA] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- T.V.SEBASTIAN, THOTTUNKAL HOUSE, KANJAR POST, IDUKKI DISTRICT- 685 592. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANJAR POLICE STATION- 685 592. *ADDL. R.3. IMPLEADED: 3. MOHANAN NAIR, S/O. P.K. MADHAVAN NAIR, ARCHANA HOUSE, SANKARAMAPADI KARA, MUTTAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. *ADDL. R.3. IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 11/01/11 ON CRL.M.P. 77/2011. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU. ADDL. R3 BY ADV. SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.3506 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 27th day of May, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is accused in Crime No.115 of 2009 of Kanjar Police Station and C.C. No.113 of 2009 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thodupuzha for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered on the complaint of additional third respondent who alleged that he had entrusted with petitioner who then was the Branch Manager of the Federal Bank Rs.53 lakhs to be deposited in his account. But petitioner deposited only Rs.49.3 lakhs, misappropriated rest of the amount and thereby committed breach of trust. The Police submitted Annexure-A, final report. Petitioner seeks to quash Annexure-A, final report and further proceedings against him on the strength of a settlement reached with the additional third respondent. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, third respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor who appeared for respondents 1 and 2. Learned counsel for petitioner and additional third respondent confirmed the settlement and genuineness of Annexure-C, photocopy of Notary CRL.M.C. No.3506 of 2010 -: 2 :- attested agreement executed between petitioner and the additional third respondent. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that since additional third respondent is abroad, the Investigating Officer could not contact him and get information regarding the settlement. 2. It is seen that the original of Annexure-C, agreement is attested before a Notary Public. In that agreement there is reference to the settlement of the dispute. It is stated that additional third respondent was under a mistaken impression of fact and on that mistaken impression he happened to file a complaint against petitioner. I find from paragraph 2 of the affidavit sworn by the additional third respondent that he has settled the dispute with the petitioner out side court and the agreement was executed on 02.10.2009 (photocopy of which is Annexure-C). It is revealed from the said affidavit and Annexure-C that parties have settled the dispute which is personal to and between petitioner and additional third respondent. In that view of the matter it is not necessary to continue the prosecution against petitioner. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure-A final report in Crime No.115 of 2009 of Kanjar police CRL.M.C. No.3506 of 2010 -: 3 :- Station, cognizance taken thereon and all proceeding against petitioner in C.C. No.113 of 2009 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thodupuzha are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv