IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 4TH JANUARY 2011 / 14TH POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 5076 of 2010() ------------------------------- CC.501/2005 of JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I, NORTH PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER(S):ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 5 ------------------------------------------- 1. ROBIN.C.R, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.ROY, CHAMMANKULAM HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. RIBIN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.ROY, CHAMMANKULAM HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. SHINOJ, AGED 30 YRS., METTEKKATU HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. LAIJAN, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.EDWIN, KOLLARASSERY HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. RATHEESH, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, KATEPARAMBIL HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.B.PRAJITH svs ............2/-... ...2... RESPONDENT(S):COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------- 1. SHALBI ANTONY, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.PEEYUS, EERATHARA HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 027. 2. JOSEPH SHAIJAN, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.PEEYUS, EERATHARA HOUSE, PIRAZHALA, KADAMAKKUDI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 027. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.SURAJ.S R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs THOMAS .P.JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.5076 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of January, 2011 ORDER Petitioners are facing trial in the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, North Paravoor in C.C.No.501/2005 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 IPC. Case is that petitioners attacked respondents 1 and 2 due to enmity and thereby committed the said offences. It is admitted that the dispute has been amicably settled between all the parties. Annexure-V affidavit of respondents 1 and 2 is also produced to that effect. In that affidavit it is stated that since the matter is amicably settled between the parties the case may be allowed to be compounded. 2. It is revealed that the trial of the case is going on. Respondents 1 and 2 were examined as Pws 1 and 2. Copy of their depositions are Annexures II and III. It is stated that they do not know the assailants, but they have stated that they suffered injuries in the incident. It is in such a situation that petitioners have filed this petition to quash the proceedings. Since trial of the case is going on and respondents 1 and 2 have stated Crl.M.C. No.5076 of 2010 2 that they sustained injury, but they could not identify the assailants, I do not consider it proper at this stage to interfere under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure notwithstanding the fact that Annexure-V affidavit states that parties have settled the disputes among them. Learned Magistrate has to examine the remaining occurrence witnesses as well. Learned counsel says that one of the (so called) occurrence witnesses is outside the country and that trial is being delayed. I direct the learned Magistrate to expedite trial of the case bearing in mind the nature of the evidence given by respondents 1 and 2. Resultantly, this petition is disposed of directing the learned Magistrate to expedite trial and disposal of the case in the light of the observations made above. THOMAS.P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. ln