IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 4TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 13TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3404 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.508/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- 1. ABDUL KHADER, S/O.NOOR MUHAMMED, AGED 33, KUTTI HASSAN HOUSE, PUTHIYANGADI, NEAR PJHS, MADAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. ABDUL JABBAR, S/IO. NOOR MUHAMMED, AGED 33, KUTTI HASSAN HOUSE, PUTHIYANGADI, NEAR PJHS, MADAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENTS: STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PAYANGADI POLICE STATION (REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.) 2. ABDUL GAFOOR, S/O. ABDULLA HAJI, AGED 31, KUTTI HASSAN HOUSE, MADAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN FOR R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3404 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of September 2008 O R D E R The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 341,323 and 506(ii) read with 34 I.P.C. Altogether there were three accused persons. The third accused alone was available for trial. After the trial, he was found not guilty and acquitted. The case against the petitioners was split up and the same is now pending before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur as C.C.No.508/07. 2. The dispute basically arose from a family dispute. All the outstanding disputes have now been settled. The de facto complainant, that is CW1 who has been arrayed as the second respondent in this proceedings has settled the disputes with the petitioners. The second respondent has compounded all the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. But the offence punishable under Section 506(ii) I.P.C alleged against the petitioners is not compoundable. All other offences are compoundable. The second respondent has filed an affidavit to Crl.M.C.No.3404/08 2 confirm that the disputes have been settled and the alleged offences have been compounded by him. He has appeared before this court through his counsel. Both counsel assert that the disputes have been settled and the offences alleged have been compounded by the second respondent. 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the prayer made in this Crl.M.C. 4. I am satisfied in the totality of circumstances available that the parties have willingly and voluntarily settled their disputes and the second respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. If legally possible and permissible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted and the proceedings against the petitioners can be brought to premature termination. But the offence under Section 506(ii) I.P.C is not compoundable. The learned counsel in these circumstances rightly rely on the decision in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287]. They submit that the dispute here is purely private and personal between the parties and there is no public interest or public Crl.M.C.No.3404/08 3 policy involved. Ground realities may be taken into account and unnecessary technical view may not be taken. The judicial time and resources may be saved. The proceedings may be brought to termination now, submits both counsel. 5. I am satisfied that this is a fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra) can be pressed into service to prematurely terminate the proceedings against the petitioners. 6. In the result, a) This petition is allowed. b) C.C No.508/2007 pending before the J.F.C.M, Payyannur against the petitioners is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C, if any, pending against the petitioners or their sureties shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3404/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.3404/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008