IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2509 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.418/2008 of JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-I (FOREST OFFENCES), THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 AND 2: ------------ 1. RAMESH, AGED 32 YEARS,S/O.CHELLA MUTHU, PARAPUR VEETIL, VELAMUADI VILLAGE, ERODE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU STATE. 2. CHELLAMUTHU, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.KUPPUSWAMI,PARAPUR VEETIL, VELAMUADI VILLAGE, ERODE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU STATE. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.S.KUMAR RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------- 1. EASHWARA MURHTHI, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.PERIASWAMI, SREEKRISHNA VILASOM VEETTIL, VENGALLOOR VEETTIL, THODUPUZHA VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA KARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY GOVT PLEADERS REPRESENTED BY S.I.OF POLICE, THODUPUZHA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI SRI.JUDE B.ALEX FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2509 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August 2008 O R D E R Petitioners - son and father face indictment in a prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 381 and 411 read with 34 I.P.C. Investigation is completed. Final report has already been filed in crime No.391/2004 of Thodupuzha police station and cognizance was taken. It is submitted that the case was pending before the learned Magistrate as L.P.No.15/08. The same has subsequently been recalled and the same is pending as C.C.No.473/2008 (and not C.C.No.418/08 as shown in the petition) before the learned J.F.C.M Court-I, Thodupuzha. During the pendency of the proceedings parties have settled the disputes. Allegations are raised in respect of non-compoundable offences. But the parties have settled their disputes and they have come to this court with a prayer that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287] may be invoked to bring to premature termination the proceedings against the petitioners. 2. The first petitioner was employed as a servant of the first respondent herein. The second petitioner/accused is the Crl.M.C.No.2509/08 2 father of the first petitioner/accused. The crux of the allegations is that an amount of Rs.48,000/- was stolen by the first petitioner/ accused from the possession of his employer, the first respondent and that the second petitioner/accused kept the same in his possession knowing the same to be stolen property. 3. The first respondent has entered appearance through counsel. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondent submit that the disputes have been settled between the parties and that the second respondent has no surviving grievance whatsoever against the petitioners. It is submitted that actually the dispute was one relating to employment and the act complained of was performed in the course of such employment by the first petitioner. The first respondent has already been compensated adequately. A joint statement has been filed by the petitioners and the first respondent duly countersigned by their counsel. It is prayed that the settlement may be taken note of and the composition by the first respondent may be accepted. 4. The learned counsel for the first respondent confirms that the matter has been settled and that the de facto complainant has compounded the offence and has affixed his signature in the joint statement. 5. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the State has no objection Crl.M.C.No.2509/08 3 against the invocation of the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra) in bringing to premature termination the proceedings against the petitioners. 6. I am satisfied in the facts and circumstances of this case that this is an eminently fit case where the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra) can be invoked and the proceedings against the petitioners can be brought to termination by invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The dispute is one relating to employment of the first petitioner by the first respondent and I am satisfied that as held in Madan Mohan (Supra) the futility of continuance of the proceedings and the fact that the purely personal dispute between the parties has been settled can be taken note of. 7. In the result, a) This petition is allowed. b) C.C.No.473/2008 (L.P.No.15/08) pending before the J.F.C.M-I, Thodupuzha against the petitioners herein is hereby quashed. Proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C, if any pending, shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2509/08 4 Crl.M.C.No.2509/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008