IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 28TH AUGUST 2008 / 6TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2398 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.811/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED 1 & 2, 6 TO 8: ---------------------------------- 1. THOMAS ANTONY, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS ANTONY, "JEENA NIVAS", VINAYAKA NAGAR. KALLAMPALLI, ULLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. VINUL VENUGOPAL, S/O.VENUGOPAL, AGED 22 YEARS, "VEENUS HOUSE", CHEVAYOOR ROAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM. 3. JERIN.J.PODIPPARA, S/O.JOSE IMMANUEAL PODDIPPARA, AGED 23 YEARS, NEAR CARMEL SCHOOL, WEST KANJIKUZHY, MUTTAMBALAM, KOTTAYAM. 4. ANOOP SASI, S/O.SASIDHARAN,AGED 22 YEARS "PRATHEESKHA", NEAR ANGANVADI, ELAYAVOOR SOUTH, KANNUR. 5. NITTU RAVI ABRAHAM, S/O.RAVI ABRAHAM, AGED 22 YEARS, 'KARINJATTIL HOUSE', TC 10/972(4), H.NO.83, BENEDICT NAGAR, NALANCHIRA, ULLOOR. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. VISHNU SANKAR, S/O.NARAYANAN POTTI, AGED 24 YEARS, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT KALIYIKKAL MADOM (H), PALACE WARD, KRISHNAPURAM, MUKKADA, KAYAMKULAM ALAPPUZHA DIST. AND NOW EMPLOYED AT BANGALORE. ADDL. 3. AKHIL ANILKUMAR, S/O.ANILKUMAR, AGED 22 YEARS, “INDEEPURAM(H), MOOTHAKUNNAM, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM(CW2). Crl.MC.No. 2398 of 2008() - 2 - ADDL. 4. BIJOY, S/O.NANDANAN, VELIKKAL HOUSE, MAANKAV, CALICUT (CW3). ADDL. 5. HAFIZ SHABEER, S/O.JAMALUDEEN, “MANIYARATHIL” HOUSE, MANGADA DESOM, MALAPPURAM (CW4). ADDL. 6. JITHIN, “SOUPARNIKA HOUSE”, KP 10.386, KAKKODI KIZHAKKUMMURI, CALICUT (CW5). ADDL. 7. KRISHNAN, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, “HEMALAYAM HOUSE” PLOT NO.L5/24, CHANGAMPUZHA NAGAR, ERNAKULAM (CW6). ADDL 8. MUJEEB ALI, S/O.AMEED ALI, CHUNKATH HOUSE, THEKKEKKARA, PATTITHARA VILLAGE, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT (CW7). (Addl. Respondents 3 to 8 are impleaded as per order dt.28.08.08 in Crl.M.Appl.No.4534 of 2008) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJESH FOR R2 SRI.M.R.RAJESH FOR ADDL.RES.3 TO 8 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2398 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of August 2008 O R D E R The petitioners herein are accused 1,2 and 6 to 8 in C.C.No.811/2007 pending before the JFMC-I, Thiruvananthapuram. Altogether there are eight accused persons in that crime. Altogether there are seven injured persons also in that crime. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Charges are raised under Sections 143,147,341,323 and 427 read with 149 I.P.C. There was a case and a counter case. The counter case has already been withdrawn by the Government, it is submitted. It is at this stage that the petitioners have come before this court with a prayer that C.C.No.811/07 pending before the JFMC-I, Thiruvananthapuram may be quashed invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287]. The second respondent is the de facto complainant. All the seven injured persons/victims have been brought on the array as respondents 2 to 8. The petitioners, along with respondents 2 to 8 report to the court that the Crl.M.C.No.2398/08 2 disputes between them have been settled amicably and that respondents 2 to 8 do not want any further proceedings against the petitioners or the other accused to continue. All the substantive offences alleged are compoundable. Except the allegations raised under Sections 143 and 147 I.P.C, all other offences are compoundable. Of course, vicarious liability is alleged invoking Section 149 I.P.C. 2. The respondents have entered appearance through counsel. They have filed affidavits which are numbered as Annexures B to H. The learned counsel on their behalf asserts that respondents 2 to 8 have no objection whatsoever against the quashing of proceedings against all accused persons invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 3. I am satisfied from the averments in the Crl.M.C as also the affidavits filed by respondents 2 to 8 as Annexures B to H that there has been a harmonious settlement of the disputes between the parties. If legally permissible and possible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted and unnecessary continuation of the further proceedings against the petitioners and the other co- accused can be brought to termination. 4. Though the offences under Sections 143 and 147 are not compoundable, I am satisfied that the dictum in Madan Mohan Crl.M.C.No.2398/08 3 (Supra) can safely be invoked. That decision is authority for the proposition that an unnecessary technical view should not be taken by courts in situations like this. Ground realities must be taken note of. Unnecessary and non-productive continuation of the proceedings must be discouraged. The judicial time must be put to optimum and profitable use. Bearing in mind the principles in the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra), I am persuaded to agree that this is an eminently fit case where powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C can safely be invoked to quash C.C.No.811/07 pending before the J.F.M.C-I, Thiruvananthapuram against the petitioners herein as also the other accused. 5. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C is allowed. b) C.C.No.811/07 pending before the J.F.M.C-I, Thiruvananthapuram against the petitioners and the other three co- accused is hereby quashed. c) Proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C, if any pending against the petitioners and the co-accused or their sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2398/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.2398/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008