IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2253 of 2009 -------------------------------- CC.858/2004 of ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIVANDRUM (CRIME NO.145/04 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM) .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. XAVIER, S/O.GILBERT,AGED 27 YEARS TPJ NAGAR, NEAR SAM WORKSHOP, HOUSE NO 11, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TITTOO,S/O. SURARAJAN, AGED 24 YEARS TC 11/1898,PANAYIL VEEDU,NETHAJI BOSE RD, KENI, NANTHANCODE. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. ABHILASH N, S/O.NAKULAN,AGED 20 YEARS MANJAMPARA HOUSE,MUKKOLA, KUDAPANNAKKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (CW1) 2. THE STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJESH FOR R1 SMT.PREETHA RANI FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI FOR R2. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2253 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.858/2004 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Prosecution case is that in furtherance of their common intention, on 25.3.2004 at about 12.30 p.m., at the instigation of the juvenile first accused in Crime No.145/2004 of Medical College Police station, petitioners herein, who were accused 2 and 3 in Crime No.145/2004 and friends of juvenile first accused, attacked first respondent/defacto complainant using a sword and inflicted injury and thereby committed offences under Sections 323, 324, 341, 506(ii) and 294(b) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. As the first accused was a juvenile, the final report as against him was submitted before the Juvenile Court and Anenxure-A final report was submitted before CRMC 2253/09 2 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram as against the petitioners. 2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings as against them contending that the disputes with the first respondent were settled and first respondent is not intending to proceed with the case and in such circumstances, even if petitioners are to be tried, no fruitful purpose would be achieved and therefore, the case is to be quashed. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), Nikhil Merchant v. CBI (2009 (3) KLT 799) and Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417). Along with the petition, Annexure-B affidavit of the first respondent is also filed. 3. First respondent appeared through a counsel. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were CRMC 2253/09 3 heard. 4. Annexure-B affidavit of the first respondent shows that there was an amicable settlement of the disputes with the petitioners and the case as against the juvenile first accused was tried by the Juvenile Court and ended in acquittal. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that in view of the settlement of the disputes, first respondent has no grievance against the petitioners at present and has no objection for quashing the proceedings. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in view of the settlement, when there is no chance of a conviction, it is not, in the interest of justice, to continue the proceedings, as declared by the Apex Court and therefore, the proceedings is to be quashed. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that in view of the settlement between the parties, there is no possibility of a successful prosecution. CRMC 2253/09 4 5. Even though all the offences alleged against the petitioners are not compoundable, when affidavit of the first respondent establishes that there was an amicable settlement of the disputes with the petitioners and due to the settlement, there is no chance for a successful prosecution, it is not, in the interest of justice, to proceed with the case and waste the valuable time of the court. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. C.C.No.858/2004 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram as against the petitioners is quashed. 27th July, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv