IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 5019 of 2010 --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.80/2009 OF ALATHUR POLICE STATION ............ PETITIONERS: 1. PRAKASHAN, S/O.LAKSMANAN, RAMATHKALAM, PARAKALAM, THONIPADAM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SHIBIN @ KRISHNADAS, S/O KUTTIKRISHNAN, RAMATHKALAM, PARAKALAM, THONIPADAM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJU SEBASTIAN VADAKKEKKARA RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALATHUR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. LEELA, W/O GANGADHARAN, AGED 54 YEARS, RAMATHKALAM, PARAKALAM, THONIPADAM, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678661. BY PP SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN FOR R1 & R2 ADV. SRI.BABY MATHEW FOR R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.5019 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are the accused and third respondent, the defacto complainant, in Crime No. 80/2009 of Alathur Police Station, registered under Annexure-I FIR for the offences under Sections 452, 354, 323, 294(b) and 506(i) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-I FIR was registered based on the F.I. Statement of the third respondent. F.I. Statement shows that she was living away from her husband Gangadharan for some time back. On 31.1.2009 at about 3 p.m., first petitioner, son of the elder brother of her husband, trespassed into the house and caught hold of the hands of the third respondent and beat on her cheek and thereafter pulled her to the courtyard and when she fell down, her dress were torn off. Second petitioner also hit her and kicked her and outraged her modesty and caused hurt and CRMC 5019/10 2 thereby committed the offences. Offences alleged are purely personal in nature against the third respondent. 2. Third respondent appeared through a counsel and filed a joint petition along with the petitioners stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, the case is to be quashed. 3. F.I. Statement itself shows that the incident was part of the property dispute. The joint petition filed by the third respondent along with the petitioners shows that entire disputes were settled amicably. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution as held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19). Petition is allowed. Crime No.80/2009 of Alathur Police Station is quashed. 22nd December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv