IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2010 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1126 of 2010() ------------------------- CP.166/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VADAKKANCHERY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ----------------------------------------- 1. UMMER P.K., AGED 39, S/O.KUNJAMU, PUZHANGARA ILLATH, VELLARAKKAD VILLAGE AND DESOM. 2. IBRAHIM, AGED 28, S/O.MUHAMMED, PUTHUVEETTIL HOUSE, VELLARAKKAD VILLAGE AND DESOM. 3. NOUSHAD, AGED 33, S/O.HAMSA, MALIYAKKAL HOUSE, VELLARAKKAD VILLAGE AND DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SMT.PREETHI K.PURUSHOTHAMAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, ERUMAPPETTY POLICE STATION, (CRIME NO.484/2008), REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. IBRAHIM, AGED 31, S/O.MUHAMMED HAJEE, VALAYAKATH HOUSE, PADINJATHUSSERI DESOM, KADUNGODE, THRISSUR, PIN-683 306. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C..No.1126 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25 th day of May, 2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.484 of 2008 of Erumapetty Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 364,323 and 324 read with 34 IPC seek to quash Annexure 1 final report in view of the settlement of the disputes as evidenced by Annexure II agreement dated 8.4.2009. 2. The matter is now pending before the J.F.C.M, Wadakkanchery as C.P.No.166 of 2009. Proceedings cannot be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C in a case involving non- compoundable offences of the above nature. This is not a money dispute so as to apply the ratio in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008(4) SCC 582) and related decisions. The remedy of the petitioners is to plead for a discharge when the matter comes before the Court of Session, after committal. Hence, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to plead for a discharge before the Court of Session, after committal of the case, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed. Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj