IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 572 of 2011() ----------------------------------- C.C.NO. 358/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO.2164/2009 OF ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED --------------------------------------- NATARAJAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.VASUKUTTY, POOVANNAPOYKAYIL HOUSE, KARAKKAD, KOTTA P.O., MULAKKUZHA VILLAGE, CHENGANOOR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. MUJEEB.A.K, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KHADER, THAJ MANZIL, KAROOR, AMBALAPUZHA, NEAR VELLANJILI MOSQUE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA R2 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.572 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.2164 of 2009 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam and C.C.No.358 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Ernakulam for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the Code”). Petitioner seeks to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached with respondent No.2, the defacto complainant. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has confirmed settlement and authenticity of Annexure-C, affidavit of respondent No.2. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instruction has confirmed the fact of settlement. 3. The only non-compoundable offence involved in the case is Section 294(b) of the Code. It is seen from Annexure-C, affidavit that the dispute is settled between petitioner and respondent No.2. In the circumstances I am inclined to allow the request. Crl.MC No.572/2011 2 Resultantly this petition is allowed. Annexure-B, final report in Crime No.2164 of 2009 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against petitioner in C.C.No.358 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Ernakulam are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks