IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2011 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 716 of 2011() ------------------------ CC.95/2010 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHPURAM CRIME NO.115/2002 OF MUSEUM POLICESTATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- 1. ARUN RAJ, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, ARUNODDAYAM VEEDU, CHADAYAMANGALAM, KOLLAM. 2. J.JOHN, S/O.YESUDASAN, THATTUVEEDU, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM. 3. A.R.ANAS, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, B.R.MANZIL, VANCHUVAM, NEDUMANGAD. 4. JOSEPRATHAP, S/O.ANTONY, THEKKATHIL VEETTIL, ARIMALLOOR, KOLLAM. 5. M.LIJU, S/O.MOHANLAL, MEENATHETHIL VEEDU, CHERUTHANA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND THE INJURED ------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SAJIMON T.MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, KUNNUMPURAM VEEDU, PAZHAYAVIDUTHI, RAJAKKAD, UDUMBANCHOLA, IDUKKI. 3. RAJIKUMAR, S/O.RAGHAVAN UNNITHAN, MADHAVAVILASOM VEEDU, PULIYOORKONAM, KILIMANOOR. 4. THOMAS KURIEN, S/O.JACOB, VALIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU, CHEERANCHIRA, CHANGANASSERY. 5. BIJU KUMAR, S/O.SASIDHARAN, VALSALA NIVAS, KUDAPPANAMOODU, VELLARADA. ADV. SRI.SUNIL J.CHAKKALACKAL FOR R2 TO R5 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.716 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of March, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused in Crime No.115 of 2002 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram and C.C.No.95 of 2010 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the Code”) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Case is that on 20.03.2002 in connection with college election two groups of students clashed and petitioners are alleged to have used sword. It is submtited that petitioners/accused have already graduated in law and either are practising as Advocates or employed in Government service. They have settled the case with respondents 2 to 5. Parties have filed a joint petition signed by their counsel as well. Defacto complainant has also filed an affidavit. These documents say that matter is settled between the parties. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, respondents 2 to 5 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for respondents 2 to 5 has confirmed the settlement and authenticity of joint petition and affidavit. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instruction has confirmed the settlement. Crl.MC No.716/2011 2 2. Incident occurred when petitioners and respondents 2 to 5 were college students and in connection with college election. Taking into account that and the fact that dispute is settled, I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1, final report in Crime No.115 of 2002 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against petitioners in C.C.No.95 of 2010 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks