IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4360 of 2010 (D) ------------------------- ( CC.990/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOCHI) .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3 ------------------------------------------------------ 1. YESUDAS, S/O.JOSEPH, PALAMBILLY VEETTIL, CC IX/540, CANAL ROAD, NAZARETH KARA, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE. 2. JOSEY MANUAL, S/O.MICHAEL, CHARANKATTU VEETTIL, MOTHER TERESA ROAD, MUNDAMVELI KARA, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE. 3. AMBROSE MANUAL, S/O.VARGHESE, VATTAMAKKAL VEETTIL, NORTH MOOLAMKUZHI KARA, RAMESWARAN VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.ASHIK K.MOHAMMED ALI RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & CHARGE WITNESS NO.1. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (REPRESENTING THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATTANCHERRY). 2. KURIAN JOSE JUNIOR, S/O.KURIAN JOSE, RESIDING AT BLOCK IVB, CHAKOLAS HABITAT, THEVARA KARA, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.I.V.PRAMOD R2 BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THOMAS THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4360 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 15th November, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.990/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kochi, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 380 and 381 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A1 final report. Prosecution case is that in furtherance of their common intention, first petitioner, the store keeper of the business concern of the second respondent, with the aid of second petitioner, who was the driver, committed theft of “Agar Agar” within a period of six months, and attempted to sell the same with the aid of Crmc 4360/10 3 third petitioner and petitioners thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings, contending that entire disputes were settled with the second respondent and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire disputes were settled between the petitioners and second respondent and he has no grievance against them and has no intention to proceed further and therefore, no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case and hence it is to be quashed. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that statements of the second respondent recorded subsequently Crmc 4360/10 3 establish that there was settlement of all the disputes. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC), when the offence alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature against the second respondent and affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.990/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's court-II, Kochi is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.