IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4865 of 2008(A) ------------------------------------- ( C.C. NO. 69/2002 OF THE J.F.C.M. OTTAPALAM) ............... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. AYYAPPAN, S/O CHANDU, MADATHIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SUNDARAN @ NARAYANAN, S/O. RAJAN, ANGADIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. VINOD @ KUNHUNNY,S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. RAJAN, S/O.KUNHUNNI, MADATHIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. ANEESH,S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, MADATHIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. MANIKANDAN, S/O.GOPALAN, NEERENGIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 7. SADANANDAN, S/O.BALAN, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 8. SUDHA @ VIJAYAMOHANAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, NEERENGIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 9. SIVASANKARAN, S/O.GOVINDAN,POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. CRL.M.C. NO.4865/2008-A: 10. RAJU., S/O.KRISHNAN,POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 11. SANTHOSH, S/O. BALAN, S/O. BALAN ,POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 12. SASI, S/O.RAJAPPAN, MADATHIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 13. PEETHAMBARAN, S/O.GOVINDAN, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 14. KRISHNAKUMARAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, ANGADIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 15. SATHISH, S/O.KRISHNAN, ANGADIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA ,REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 2. AYYAPPANKUTTY @ MANI, S/O.KRISHNAN, PANTHARIKUNNATH HOUSE, IRIMBALASSERY, NELLAYA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. PARUKUTTY, D/O.NANU, POOLAKKAL HOUSE, PERUMANGODE, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR, R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4865 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of December 2008 O R D E R The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable inter alia under Section 326 read with 149 I.P.C. Respondents 2 and 3 are the injured/victims. The 3rd respondent is a widow and relative of the petitioners, it is submitted. The 2nd respondent had allegedly gone to the house of the 3rd respondent and misconstruing the purpose of his visit, the petitioners had raised objections and in the course of that incident, the occurrence in this case had taken place, it is submitted. The parties who are relatives and neighbours have settled the disputes and accordingly respondents 2 and 3/victims have compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. An affidavit has been filed by respondents 2 and 3 to confirm such settlement/composition. They have appeared through counsel and the learned counsel confirms that the matter has been settled between the parties. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 pray, the learned Public Prosecutor after Crl.M.C.No.4865/08 2 taking instructions does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied 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 [2008 AIR SCW 2287], Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008(3) KLT 769(SC)] and Manoj Sharma v. State [2008(4)KLT 417 SC] can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against the petitioner. 3. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. b) C.C.No.69/2002 pending before the J.F.C.M, Ottappalam in which the petitioners are the accused and respondents 2 and 3 are the injured is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.4865/08 3 Crl.M.C.No.4865/08 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008