IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 2ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 11TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3607 of 2010() ------------------------- AGAINST C.C.NO.360/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PONNAN. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ----------------------------- 1. SHANAVAS, S/O.ABDULLAKUTTY, KANAYIKKAL HOUSE, PUZHAMBRAM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM. 2. SARU, W/O.ABDULLAKUTTY, KANAYIKKAL HOUSE, PUZHAMBRAM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM. 3. SHANIBA, D/O.ABDULLAKUTTY, KANAYIKKAL HOUSE, PUZHAMBRAM, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE -------------------------------------------- 1. FEMEENA, D/O.KUNJIMON, POONAKKATTEL HOUSE, ATHANI, KANJIRAMUKKU, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMBADAPPU POLICE STATION, PONNANI, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI.P.A.SALIM, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3607 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners, the accused in C.C.No.360/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ponnani, filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-I final report contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with first respondent, the defacto complainant. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that she is the defacto complainant and she has settled all the disputes with the petitioners and therefore, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Crime was registered based on a complaint filed by the first respondent before Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ponnani and sent for CRMC 36087/10 2 investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. In Annexure-I final report, prosecution allege that petitioners committed offences under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. An offence under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code is compoundable under sub-section (2) of Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure by the person cheated with the permission of the court. Though an offence under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code is also made compoundable with the leave of the court, it is permissible only if the value of the property does not exceed Rs.2,000/-. As the value of the property in this case exceeds Rs.2,000/-, the offence under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code cannot be compounded. When the affidavit filed by the first respondent establishes that there has been a complete settlement of the disputes, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution as there is no likelihood of a successful CRMC 36087/10 3 prosecution and it will result only in unnecessary waste of valuable time of the court, as held by the Apex Court in Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417). Petition is allowed. C.C.No.360/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ponnani is quashed. 2nd September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv