IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 557 of 2011() ------------------------------------ L.P.C.NO.67/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, KANNUR CRIME NO.448/2004 OF VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED --------------------------------------- N.K. SURENDRAN, S/O. KUNHIKANNAN, NEAR ASSARI COMPANY, CHIRAKKAL AMSOM, PUZHANTHI DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. P.V. SREEDHARAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, PUNNOTIL VETTIL HOUSE, PAPPINISSERI AMSOM, DESOM, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 561. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR R2 BY ADV. SRI.KISHORE. B. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.557 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.448 of 2004 of Valapattanam Police Station and C.C.No.281 of 2005 and L.P.C.No.67 of 2007 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur for offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. At the time accused Nos.2 and 3 were tried, petitioner was in Gulf and hence he could not take part in the trial. Case against accused Nos.2 and 3 ended in acquittal. Case against petitioner was split up and refiled as C.C.No.53 of 2007 and since he was not available, included in the Long Pending Register as L.P.C.No.67 of 2007. Petitioner seeks to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached with respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has sworn Annexure-II, affidavit stating settlement reached between the parties. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. It is seen from the affidavit filed by respondent No.2 that the dispute is settled between him and petitioner. It is stated in Annexure-II, affidavit that respondent No.2 got the money from petitioner and he has no further grievance in the matter. Since the dispute is settled between parties and since the offence is purely personal to and between petitioner and respondent No.2 I am inclined to allow this petition. Crl.MC No.557/2011 2 Resultantly this petition is allowed. Final report in Crime No.448 of 2004 of Valapattanam Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding in C.C.No.53 of 2007 and L.P.C.No.67 of 2007 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kannur to the extent it concerned petitioner are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks