IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4834 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.148/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, ATTINGAL .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED (A1 TO A5): ---------------------------------- 1. SUDHIR, S/O.ABU BAKER, NAJMA MANZIL, PACHIRA WARD, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE (A1) 2. SHAFFI, S/O.NISSAR, THUPPATTIYAL VEEDU, -DO- VILLAGE (A2). 3. NISHAN @ CHAKKUTTAN, S/O.SHAFEEK, NISHA NIVAS, -DO- VILLAGE (A3). 4. SUDHIR, S/O.NAZIR, THUPPATTIYIL VEEDU, -DO- VILLAGE (A4). 5. SAJEER, S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, RABEENA MANZIL, VAILOOR VILLAGE (A4) BY ADV. SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE ASST. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION-REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. NISSAR, S/O.ASSAINARU PILLAI, AGED 45, ALIA MANZIL, AYANIMOODU, POTHENCODE (DE FACTO COMPLAINANT/INJURED). ADV. SRI.M.ALTHAF FOR R2 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4834 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341 and 323 r/w. 149 I.P.C. The substantive offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 are compoundable. But the offences alleged under Sections 143 and 147 are not compoundable. Investigation is complete. Final report has been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Trial has not commenced. 2. At this juncture the petitioners/accused and the second respondent/victim have come before this Court to apprise this court of the fact that the parties have settled their disputes and the second respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. The dispute is one which is private and personal between the parties. There is no issue of any public interest or public issues involved, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. Crl.M.C.No. 4834 of 2008 2 3. The second respondent has entered appearance through a counsel. He has filed an affidavit to confirm settlement/composition. The counsel confirms that the disputes have been settled. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners and second respondent pray, the learned Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied in the facts and circumstances of this case that this is an eminently fit case where the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), Nikil Merchant v. C.B.I. (2008 (3) KLT 769) and Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC) can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against the petitioner. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. b) C.C. 148 of 2007 pending before the J.F.M.C.-II, Attingal, in which the petitioners herein are the accused and the second respondent is the victim, is hereby quashed. Crl.M.C.No. 4834 of 2008 3 c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioner and the sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) Judge tm