IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2009 / 13TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2265 of 2009() -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.61/09 OF THE KODANCHERY POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ 1. SUBAIR A.K., S/O. LATE MOHAMMED, AEERACKAL HOUSE, AVILORA P.O., KODUVALLY. 2. ABDUL NAZAR, S/O. POKKAR, PURAYIL, AVILORA, KIZHAKKOTH AMSOM DESOM. 3. ABDUL RAZAK, S/O. MOIDEEN, PARACKAL HOUSE, AVILORA P.O., KODUVALLY. 4. APPU @ MOHAMMED, S/O. MOIDU, PARACKAL HOUSE, AVILORA P.O., KODUVALLY. BY ADV. MR.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THAJUDEEN K., S/O. MOHAMMED, KUNNUMMAL VEEDU, AVILORA, KIZHAKKOTH AMSOM DESOM. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI R2 BY ADV. MR.NISHIL.P.S. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2265 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 4th August 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are accused in crime No.61/2009 of Kodancherry police station. On the first information statement of second respondent Crime 61/2009 was registered for the offences under Sections 365, 323 and 342 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-1 FIR shows that allegation of the first respondent that he was abducted by petitioners and also caused hurt demanding payment of the money due to the petitioners. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, contending that the dispute with second respondent was settled and in such circumstances, to secure justice the case is to be quashed. 2. Annexure-2 affidavit of second respondent was filed stating that though there was a mediation and second respondent agreed to pay the amount he could not keep up the time schedule and as a result there was some altercation between CRMC 2265/09 2 petitioners and second respondent and on that dispute FI statement was lodged and subsequently the entire disputes were resolved and now no more dispute exists and in such circumstances, second respondent has no intention to prosecute the petitioners and hence he has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Second respondent appeared though a counsel. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners and second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure-1 FI statement establishes that the allegation against petitioners are that they caused hurt to second respondent after abducting him, demanding the amount due to them. Annexure-2 affidavit of second respondent establish that the amount due was payable, as agreed under a mediation and a previous settlement and second respondent could not keep up the time schedule for payment. Affidavit further shows that subsequently there was a further settlement of all the disputes and consequent to the settlement, second respondent has no grievance against the petitioners. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to proceed with the case further as CRMC 2265/09 3 possibility of conviction is very bleak. Hence in order to secure justice Annexure-1 FIR is to be quashed. Petition is allowed. Annexure-1 FIR in crime 61/2009 of Kodanchery police station is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.