IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3651 of 2009() ------------------------- SC.NO.9/2006 OF ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, VATAKARA LP.14/2008 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, VADAKARA .................... (CRIME NO.116/2005 OF NADAPURAM POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- NOUFAL, S/O. MUHAMMED, SRAMBIYIL HOUSE, KODENCHERRY.P.O, PURAMERI VIA, VATAKARA TALUK. BY ADVS. MR.RAJIT, MR.RANJIT BABU. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SRAMBIYIL GANGADHARAN, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. SANKARAN ADIYODI, KAILAS HOUSE, KODENCHERI DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A. SALIM R2 BY ADV. MR.LOWEL CHERIAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2009 ALONG WITH CRMC NO. 3711 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ----------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.NOs.3651 & 3711 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated 10th December 2009 O R D E R Petitioner in Crl.M.C.3651/2009 who is the accused in L.P.14/2008, was the original second accused in S.C.9/2006 on the file of Additional Sessions court, Vatakara. Petitioner in Crl.M.C.3711/2009 was the original first accused in S.C.9/2006 and now the sole accused in S.C.130/2009. Petitions are filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cases pending against them, contending that in view of the settlement of the disputes with second respondent, the de facto complainant/injured, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed separate affidavits in both the petitions stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and in view of the settlement, he has no grievance against the petitioners and offences alleged are purely personal in nature and he has no objection Crmc 3651 & 3711/09 2 for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Final report taken cognizance by the learned Sessions Judge establishes that prosecution case is that in furtherance of the common intention of all the accused, on 26/3/2005 at about 11.15 a.m the accused attacked second respondent and inflicted injuries by beating with iron rod and wooden stick after committing trespass into the shop room and but for intervention of the neighbours, they would have caused the death of the second respondent and all of them thereby committed the offences under Sections 452, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that injuries sustained by the second respondent are not serious injuries. Final report shows that offences alleged against petitioners are purely personal in nature as against the second respondent. Affidavits filed by second respondent establishes that disputes of the petitioners were settled amicably. 5. As held by the Apex court in Madan Mohan Crmc 3651 & 3711/09 3 Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC), when the offences are purely personal in nature and second respondent, the injured, settled the dispute with petitioners and has no intention to proceed with the case, even if petitioners are to be tried, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. S.C.130/2009 and L.P.14/2008 on the file of Additional Sessions court, Vatakara are quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.