IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2008 / 30TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3708 of 2008() ----------------------------------- (C.C. NO.180/2006 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOLENCHERY.) ........ PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- CHANDRAN S/O. KUNJON AGED 30 YEARS, VALEKKUDY HOUSE, KAITHAKKADU, PATTIMATTOM P.O., KERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. VASU S/O. KOCHOL AGED 43 YEARS, VALEKKUDY HOUSE,KAITHAKKADU PATTIMATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. ARYA VASU D/O. VASU AGED 19 YEARS VALEKKUDY HOUSE, KAITHAKKADU PATTIMATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3708 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the sole accused facing indictment in a prosecution under Section 363 I.P.C. The third respondent is the minor who was allegedly kidnapped. She has now attained the age of majority. The second respondent is the father and was the guardian of the third respondent at the relevant time. The petitioner herein is the husband of the sister of the mother of the third respondent. The alleged incident took place on 15/11/2005. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. 2. At this stage, the petitioner and respondents 2 and 3 have appeared before this court to apprise this court of the fact that they, being relatives, have settled all their outstanding disputes. Respondents 2 and 3 do not now want to proceed against the petitioner. They have compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner. In these circumstances, it is prayed that invoking the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287], the proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No.3708/08 2 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor after taking instructions, confirms that the matter has been settled between the parties and that the State has no objection against quashing of proceedings. Both respondents 2 and 3 have entered appearance through counsel and have confirmed the settlement/composition by affidavits filed by them duly attested by their counsel. 4. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra) can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the prosecution against the petitioner herein. 5. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. b) C.C.No.180/06 pending before the learned J.F.C.M, Kolenchery where the petitioner herein is the accused and the third respondent is the victim and the second respondent is the complainant is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C, if any, pending against the accused and his sureties shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3708/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.3708/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008