IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 454 of 2009() ---------------------------------- CRIME NO.113/2002 OF GURUAYOOR POLICE STATION. S.C. NO.664/2007 OF PRL. ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, THRISSUR. ........... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1, 5 AND 6 ------------------------- 1. BASITH, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, KARAPPAN VEEDU, CHOWALLOOR, THRISSUR DIST. 2. ASHRAF, S/O. KUNHIMOIDU, PUZHANKARA ILLATHU, CHOWALLOOR, THRISSUR DISTICT. 3. SALIM, S/O. KUNHIMON, AMBALATH VEEDU, CHOWALLOOR, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. MR.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. BHAJI, S/O. CHANDRAN, VAMPULLY HOUSE, CHOWALLOOR, KANDANASSERY, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA , REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. MRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.454 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of February, 2009 ORDER Petitioners face indictment as accused 1, 5 and 6 on the basis of a final report submitted in Crime No.113 of 2002 of Guruvayur Police Station. Altogether there were 8 accused persons. Accused 2 and 4 faced trial. They were found not guilty and acquitted as per Annexure-I judgment of acquittal dated 20.09.2007 in S.C.No.367 of 2003. The case against the 7th accused was quashed as per Annexure-II order dated 20.06.08 in Crl.M.C No.2122 f 2008. The case against accused Nos.3 and 8 was quashed as per Annexure-III order dated 09.07.08 in Crl.M.C.No.2580 of 2008. The petitioners are the sole surviving accused in the case. The case against them has been split up and re-filed and the same is now pending as S.C.No.664 of 2007 before the Principal Assistant Sessions Court, Trichur, it is submitted. For identical reasons as were accepted in Annexures-II and III judgments which led to quashing of prosecution against accused Nos.7, 3 and 8, the prosecution against the petitioners may also be quashed, it is Crl.M.C. No.454 of 2009 2 submitted. The victim, the 1st respondent has entered appearance through counsel to confirm such composition/settlement. A joint application for composition duly signed by the petitioners and the 1st respondent and countersigned by their counsel has also been filed. Annexure-IV affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent to confirm such settlement/composition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the 1st respondent pray; the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that this is an eminently fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction available to this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 (3) KLT 19], Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I [2008(3) KLT 769 (SC)] and Manoj Sharma v. State [2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC)] can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant surviving prosecution against the petitioners. The learned Public Prosecutor confirms that the disputes are purely private and personal between the contestants and no issues of public justice or public interests are directly involved. Crl.M.C. No.454 of 2009 3 3. In the result: i) This Crl.M.C is allowed; ii) S.C.No.664 of 2007 pending before the Principal Assistant Sessions Court, Trichur in which the petitioners are the surviving accused and the 1st respondent/defacto complainant is the victim is hereby quashed; iii) Needless to say, proceedings, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C, shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-