IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2009 / 7TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2476 of 2009 -------------------------------- LP.45/2004 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE ......................................... PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- P.BEENA, D/O. MUHAMMADALI, PILAPARAMBIL HOUSE, VELIPRAM AMSOM DESOM, RAMANATTUKARA. KOZHIKODE BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BEYPORE POLICE STATION, BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE. 3. N.PUSHPARAJ, S/O. LATE SAMI, PUSHYARAGAM, P.O. NORTH BEYPORE, NADUVATTOM AMSOM DESOM, KOZHIKODE. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. B.VINOD ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA FOR R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO. 2476 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 29th July 2009 O R D E R Petitioner, the first accused in C.C.531/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case which is now pending against her as L.P.45/2004. Prosecution case is that on 7/3/001 at about 8.30 p.m in furtherance of their common intention, accused cheated third respondent, defacto complainant for RS.75,000/- and thereby committed offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. As petitioner was absconding, second accused was tried and under Annexure-B judgment learned Magistrate found her not guilty and acquitted her. This petition is filed contending that the dispute with third respondent defacto complainant was settled as evidenced by Annexure-C affidavit filed by him and in view of the settlement as well as due to the acquittal of the co-accused, it is not in CRMC 2476/09 2 the interest of justice to continue the proceedings. 2. Third respondent appeared through a counsel and submitted that third respondent has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner and third respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure-B judgment shows that co-accused was acquitted after evidence was recorded. Annexure-C affidavit filed by third respondent establish that he has received the entire amount due to him from the petitioner and he has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioner. In such circumstances, even if petitioner is to be tried there is no likelihood of conviction. In such circumstances, it would only be the mere waste of valuable time of the court. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice case pending against petitioner is to be quashed. Petition is allowed. L.P.45/2004 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.