IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4314 of 2010() ----------------------------------- ( CRIME NO. 692 OF 2007 IN LPC.136/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, HOSDRUG ) .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NOS 1 & 2 ----------------------------------------------------- 1. SHAIJU.B., S/O. RAGHUNATHAN, BALLAKADAPPURAM BALLA VILLAGE, KASARGOD DISTRICT. 2. P.K. SANAL, S/O. KOTTAN, BALLA KADAPPURAM, BALLA VILLAGE, KASARGODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI RESPONDENT(S): STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & CW 7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. JAFFER.P., S/O. K.K.MUHAMMED, K.K.HOUSE, BALA KADAPPURAM, VADEKKARAMUKKU, BALLA VILLAGE, KASARGOD DISTRICT. 3. JASEENA, W/O. ABOOBACKER, K.K.HOUSE, BALLA KADAPPURAM, VADAKKARAMUKKU BALLA VILLAGE, KASARGOD DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V.PRAMOD R2 BY ADV. SMT.BINDU GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4314 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 24th November, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and respondents 2 and 3, the de facto complainant and the owner of Omni van No.KL-14D-6056 which was damaged in C.C.51/2008 taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 447, 427, 435 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, by Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg on Annexure-1 final report. Subsequently when the accused absconded, case was transferred to the register of long pending cases. It is now pending as L.P.136/2009. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings Crmc 4314/2010 2 contending that entire disputes were settled amicably with respondents 2 and 3 and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, respondents 2 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Respondents 2 and 3 filed separate affidavits stating that they have settled all the disputes amicably and in view of the settlement, they have no objection for quashing the proceedings. Annexuer-1 final report shows that prosecution case is that in furtherance of the common intention, on the early morning of 15/11/2007 at about 2.45 a.m, petitioners trespassed into the residential property of the second respondent and thereafter caused damages to the motor bike of the second respondent and Crmc 4314/2010 3 Omni van belonging to third respondent and and thereby committed the offences. Affidavit filed bythe second respondent establishes that he has settled all the disputes with the petitioners. Affidavit filed by third respondent shows that she as the owner of the Omni Van settled all the disputes with the petitioners. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) when offences alleged are purely personal in nature and respondents 2 and 3, the de facto complainant and the owner of the vehicle, have settled all the disputes with the petitioners, and consequent to the settlement, continuation of the proceedings is only an abuse of process of the court, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. L.P.136/2009 on the Crmc 4314/2010 4 file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Hosdurg is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.