IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 576 of 2011() ----------------------------- SC.751/2010 of DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (FAST TRACK-I), ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ------------------------------- ABDUL NISHAD,AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMED, KANDAMANGALATH CHIRA,WARD NO.10, AROOKUTTY PO, CHERTHALA,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ASHIK K.MOHAMMED ALI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & CHARGE WITNESS NO.1. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM (REP.THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,POOCHAKKAL POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT). 2. SIDDIQUE,AGED 50 YEARS,S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY,RESIDING AT MULLASERRY HOUSE, ERAVELY BHAGOM, FORT KOCHI,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA R-2 BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THOMAS THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.576 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 14th day of March, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.152 of 2009 of Poochakkal Police Station and S.C.No.751 of 2010 of Additional Sessions Court (Fast Track-I), Alappuzha for offences punishable under Secs.452, 326 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. Case is that on 12.06.2010 at about 1.30 a.m on account of previous enmity petitioner trespassed into the house of the second respondent/de facto complainant and assaulted him with chopeer on the right shoulder and caused grievous hurt. There was again an assault on the neck with intend to cause his death which he averted. Petitioner request this Court to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached with the second respondent. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for second respondent confirmed the settlement and authenticity of Annexure-A2, affidavit sworn by the second respondent. It is also submitted by counsel on both sides that the parties are closely related and that petitioner is not involved in any other case. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting Crl.M.C.No.576 of 2011 -: 2 :- instruction has submitted that the parties are related, dispute is settled between them and that no other case is reported against petitioner. 2. Circumstances stated above show that petitioner is not involved in any other case and that himself and second respondent are relatives. Though offences under Secs.452, 326 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code are also involved, it is submitted by learned counsel on both sides that petitioner has met all treatment expenses of the second respondent. The alleged incident occurred at about 1.30a.m. The success of prosecution depends on the evidence that second respondent is to give in Court. Moreover, cordial relationship between the parties could be maintained if proceedings are terminated. Having regard to these aspects I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.152 of 2009 of Poochakkal Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against petitioner in S.C.No.751 of 2010 of the Additional Sessions Court (Fast Track-I), Alappuzha are quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-