IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 238 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CC.260/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KATTAKADA CRIME NO.463/2008 OF KATTAKADA POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------ PRASAD KUMAR, S/O.SREEKUMAR, KARIMBUVILAKUZHI MELE PUTHEN VEEDU, ALAMCODE, AMBALATHINKAL, PARACHAL MURI, KULATHUMMAL VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. BY ADV. MR.G.SUDHEER, SMT.M.JAYASREE. RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SASIDHARAN, S/O.SUKUMARA PANIKER, ARUN BHAVAN, ALAMCODE, AMBALATHINKALA, PARACHAL MURI, KULATHUMMAL VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U. NAZAR R2 BY ADV. MR.S.K.VINOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.238 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 25th February 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.260/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kattakada, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 323, 326 and 506(ii) of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A3 final report. Prosecution case is that on 20/10/2009 at 9.30 a.m petitioner, due to enmity regarding matrimonial disputes and pendency of the case before the Family court regarding marriage of the petitioner with Asha, daughter of second respondent, caused grievous hurt by beating him with a stick and thereby committed the offences. Crmc 238/10 2 Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with the second respondent and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, he has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that statement of the second respondent recorded revealed that disputes were settled. 4. Offences alleged against petitioners are purely personal in nature against second respondent. Prosecution case itself is that Crmc 238/10 3 second respondent was attacked by the petitioner, consequent to his matrimonial disputes with the daughter of second respondent. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that entire disputes were settled. As held by the Apex court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) when offences alleged against the petitioner are purely personal in nature, against second respondent and second respondent has amicably settled the disputes with the petitioner, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.260/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kattakada is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.