IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2011 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1232 of 2011() ------------------------------------ CC.NO. 440/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-V, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2 ------------------------------------------------------- 1. THOUSEEF,S/O.SHARAFUDHEEN,R/AT SIVYAM-KAPPIL,UDUMA P.O, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. NIYAS,S/O.ABDUL NASAR,R/AT HYFAS, THIRUVANNUR,P.O KALLAI. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. RAJEENDRAN,S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, RAJEEVAM HOUSE, PALAYIPARAMB,FEROKE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA,THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.R.SREEJITH R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No. 1232 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 30th day of May, 2011 ORDER Seven accused including petitioners/accused 1 and 2 were charge sheeted by the Feroke Police in Crime No.222 of 2001 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 323, 324 and 506(1) and 427 read with Sec.147 of Indian Penal Code. 2. The case is that on 12.12.2001 petitioners and others formed themselves into an unlawful assembly in front of shop of the 1st respondent, there was some altercation and following that, the alleged incident occurred. The accused other than petitioners faced trial and as the learned counsel for the petitioners submits, were acquitted by the learned Magistrate. Petitioners request this Court to quash proceedings against them in C.C No.440 of 2007 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode on the strength of a settlement reached with the first respondent. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioners were students at the relevant time and are not involved in any other cases. In the above circumstances, proceedings against them may be quashed accepting the settlement, it is argued. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for first respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Counsel for the petitioners and first respondent have confirmed settlement and authenticity and genuineness of the joint petition signed by the parties and their Crl.M.C.No.1232 of 2011(D) -: 2 :- counsel. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted on instruction that parties have settled the dispute. Annexure-A1 Final Report is filed against the petitioners and other identifiable persons. Learned Public Prosecutor was not able to say whether those identifiable persons were traced and the case against them was disposed of. 4. Though, offences involving public tranquility are also involved taking into account the nature of the incident, that petitioners were students at the relevant time and that other accused are already acquitted for want of evidence, I am inclined to accept the settlement reached between the parties, since sending petitioners for trial on the face of the settlement would be of no use as well. Resultantly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Proceedings in C.C No. 440 of 2007 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-V, Kozhikode to the extent it concerned petitioners are quashed. Sd/- THOMAS P JOSEPH JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE krj