IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3271 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.853/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRTE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- GEETHA, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, VATTAMALA HOUSE, KALLUMKUNNU, PUTHOOR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU, MR.M.REVIKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS & STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. GOPI, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.RAMAN, RESIDING AT KARUVEETIL, KAITHUR DESOM, PUTHOOR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3271 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused and first respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.No.853/2005, now pending as L.P.No.117/2009, on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-III, Thrissur, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code upon Annexure-A final report. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that the entire disputes between the petitioner and first respondent were settled and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to continue with the prosecution. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed Annexure-B affidavit stating that subsequent to the incident, all the disputes between the parties were amicably settled at the intervention of mediators and well wishers and he has no objection for quashing the proceedings, as the offence is not compoundable. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. CRMC 3271/09 2 4. Though an offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code is not compoundable under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, as held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), when there is an amicable settlement of the disputes between the injured and the accused and consequent to the settlement, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution and in such circumstances, the trial would result only in unnecessary waste of the valuable time of the court. Hence, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. That exactly is the case herein. Annexure-B affidavit of the first respondent establishes that there is a complete settlement of all the disputes between the parties and consequent to the settlement, there is no likelihood of a successful conviction. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. L.P.No.117/2009 (C.C.No. 853/2005) on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-III, Thrissur is quashed. 12th October, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv