IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 26TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3438 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1328/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO.359/1999 OF CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------- JOHNSON, S/O. TOMY, KALLUVEETIL, BEACH ROAD, THOPPUMPADY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU RESPONDENTS: STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CENTRAL POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. B.J. JOSEPH, S/O. JOSEPH, AGED 67 YEARS, VALIYAPARAMBIL, NORTH OF LIZZY HOSPITAL, THRIKKANARVATTOM, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB ADV. SRI.VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.3438 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2008 ORDER Petitioner is the accused in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 452 and 324 I.P.C. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. The matter is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Ernakulam as C.C.No.1328 of 2003. The crux of the allegations is that consequent to a dispute regarding the payment of an amount - whether as a rent or as dividend, the accused/tenant had gone to the premise of the defacto complainant/landlord and had allegedly indulged in the culpable conduct. The matter is pending before the learned Magistrate. At this stage, the parties have come before this Court to apprise this Court of the fact that the disputes between them have been settled and the defacto complainant/2nd respondent has compounded the offences alleged against the petitioners. The offences alleged include the offence under Section 452 I.P.C, which is not compoundable. In these circumstances the parties are not able to seek composition before the Magistrate. It is hence prayed that the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked to Crl.M.C. No.3438 of 2008 2 quash the proceedings against the petitioner. The 2nd respondent has entered appearance through counsel. An application for composition duly signed by the rival contestants and counter signed by the respective counsel has also been filed to confirm that the matter has been settled. 2. I am satisfied that there has been a voluntary and genuine settlement of the disputes. If legally permissible and possible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted and the proceedings against the petitioner can be brought to premature termination. 3. But the offence under Section 452 I.P.C is not legally compoundable. The counsel, in these circumstances, pray that the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 A.I.R SCW 2287] may be imported and proceedings may be quashed. The dispute is one which is purely personal and private between the parties. The disputes have been settled. Harmony has returned in the relationship between the contestants. Ground realities may be taken into account. It may be noted that there is no issues of public interest or public dispute involved. The interests of optimum use of judicial time may also be taken into consideration. In these circumstances the Crl.M.C. No.3438 of 2008 3 dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab may be imported and proceedings may be terminated, pray the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent vouches for the signature of the 2nd respondent in the application for composition. 4. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am persuaded to agree that this is an eminently fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab can be safely imported and the prosecution against the petitioner can be brought to premature termination. 5. In the result: i) This Crl.M.C is allowed; ii) C.C.No.1328 of 2003 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Ernakulam against the petitioner is hereby quashed; iii) Needless to say, proceedings if any pending against the petitioner and his sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-