IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2009 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3492 of 2009() ------------------------------------ L.P.130/2005 IN CC.294/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, KANNUR CRIME NO.25/2001 OF VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- E. SAIDALAVI, S/O.ABDULLA, EDAKANDAN HOUSE, VENGARA AMSOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.DEVIDAS.U.K RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, VALAPATTANAM THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.P. SHOUKATHALI, S/O.ABOOBACKER, ALAIMAHAL, PAPINISSERY VILLAGE, MANKADAVU, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. K.P. ABDUL NASAR, S/O.MUHAMMED, ALAIMAHAL, PAPINISSERY VILLAGE, MANKADAVU, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.S. SIVAKUMAR. R2 & R3 BY ADV. MR.V.MUHAMMED RAFEEQ. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.3492 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 3rd December 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is fourth accused and respondents 2 and 3 are the de facto complainant and the injured in C.C.294/2002 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that in view of the settlement arrived at with respondents 2 and 3, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Respondents 2 and 3 filed separate affidavits stating that entire disputes with all the accused were settled amicably and in such circumstances, they are not interested in prosecuting the case and they have no objection for quashing the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Crmc 3492/09 2 3. Annexure-A final report shows that prosecution case is that at about 7.30 a.m on 10/1/2001 at Mankadavu four accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of causing hurt with another identifiable person along with the identifiable person, caused hurt to respondents 2 and 3 by beating with rods and thereby committed offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 343, 363 and 324 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 4. The offences alleged are purely personal in nature as against respondents 2 and 3. Affidavit filed by respondents 2 and 3 establish that there has been a complete settlement of all the disputes with all the accused. In such circumstances, as held by the Apex court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, when consequent to the settlement, chances of a successful prosecution is very bleak. Though petitioner sought to quash the case only as against the petitioner, affidavits filed by respondents 2 and 3 establish that entire disputes were settled with all the accused. Hence it is not in Crmc 3492/09 3 the interest of justice to continue the prosecution as against the remaining accused also or compelling them to approach this court by filing another petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. L.P.130/2005 in S.C.294/2002 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.