IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2008 / 14TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2835 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 87/07 OF MELATTUR POLICE STATION L.P. 43/08 IN CC.47/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, PERINTHALMANNA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ RAFEEQ @ MOHAMMED RAFEEQ S/O.ABOOBACKER, PUTHUKKADI HOUSE ANJILANGADI, EDAPATTA AMSOM,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CR.N O. 87 OF 2007 OF MELATTUR POLICE STATION) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 2835 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 5th day of August, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 r/w. 34 I.P.C. All the three substantive offences i.e. the one punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 324 I.P.C. are legally compoundable, but the offences alleged under Sections 143, 147 and 148 are not compoundable. 2. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. All other co- accused, except the petitioner, stood trial. They were found not guilty and acquitted as per Annex.III judgment dt. 7.1.2008. The petitioner did not appear before the learned Magistrate after cognizance was taken. The case against him was split up and refiled. He has not so far entered appearance. 3. At this stage, the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition along with the five injured persons, who have now Crl.M.C.No. 2835 of 2008 2 been brought on the array of accused as additional respondents 2 to 6. The additional respondents 2 to 6 have filed an affidavit to confirm that they have settled their disputes with the petitioner and have compounded the offences allegedly committed against them by the petitioner. In these circumstances the petitioner and additional respondents 2 to 6 pray that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the surviving prosecution against the petitioner herein. All other co-accused having already been acquitted and the prosecution having no case that any one other than the six accused persons arrayed were involved in the crime, offences under Sections 143, 147 and 148 I.P.C. are not sustainable against the petitioner, submits counsel. 4. Even ignoring all that, in the light of the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 AIR SCW 2287) this Court may take a realistic view and resort to premature termination of the proceedings against the petitioner. Continuance of the prosecution is unlikely to produce any tangible results. It will be a waste of time and resources of the court. The prosecution may, in these circumstances, be quashed, it is submitted. Crl.M.C.No. 2835 of 2008 3 5. Additional respondents 2 to 6 have entered appearance. They have filed a joint affidavit. The counsel confirms that the victims have settled their disputes. The learned Prosecutor was directed to take instructions. The learned Prosecutor submits that the State convinced that additional respondents 2 to 6 have genuinely and voluntarily settled their disputes and they have compounded the offences alleged against the petitioner herein. The offences are not compoundable. But the dispute is purely personal and private between the parties. The State has no objection against the invocation of the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) to bring to premature termination the surviving prosecution against the petitioner. 6. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the joint request made by the petitioner and the additional respondents. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) can be invoked to bring to premature termination the prosecution against the petitioner. 7. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. Crl.M.C.No. 2835 of 2008 4 b) C.C. 47 of 2008 (LP 43 of 2008) pending before the JFMC -II, Perinthalmanna against the petitioner is hereby quashed. c) Proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioner or the sureties, needless to say, shall continue to its logical conclusion. (R. BASANT) Judge tm