IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4168 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.173/05 OF MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION CC.536/2006 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUHAMMED HANEEFA, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED, KURUDAPADAVU HOUSE, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE,POST KURUDAPADAVU, KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MANJESHWAR, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADDL.R2. BABYSA SHETTY, S/O. JAYARAMA, KURIYA HOUSE, KURUDAPADAVU, PAIVALIKE GRAMAM KASARGOD DIST. 3. BALAKRISHNA SHETTY, S/O. KINJANNA SHETTY DO. DO. 4. ANIL AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. GANGADHARAN R/A KURUDAPADAVU, KURUDAPADAVU P.O. PAIVALIKE GRAMAM, KASARAGOD DIST. ADDL.R2 TO 4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON CRL.M.A. NOS. 6532/08 & 188/09 DT. 14.1.2009. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB ADV. SRI.AJEESH S.BRITE FOR R2 & R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4168 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 O R D E R The petitioner, along with six others, faced indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323 and 324 r/w. 149 I.P.C. All other offences alleged are compoundable. But the offences alleged under sections 143, 147 and 148 are not compoundable. Vicarious liability with the aid of Section 149 I.P.C. is alleged against the accused. 2. Final report was filed. All the other five accused faced indictment. The petitioner was not available for trial. All the co-accused were found not guilty and acquitted as per Annex.A1 judgment dt.26.3.2007. The case against the petitioner was split up and refiled. 3. The petitioner/A3 has come before this Court with a prayer that the co-accused having already been acquitted, the surviving prosecution against him may also be quashed. In the course of the pendency of the proceedings the petitioner Crl.M.C.No. 4168 of 2008 2 attempted to re-enforce his prayer for quashing of proceedings with the contention that the victims, i.e. R2 to R4 herein, have already compounded the offences alleged against the petitioner herein. A joint application for composition has been filed by respondents 2 and 3 and the petitioner initially. Later a further application for composition has been filed jointly by the petitioner and the 4th respondent. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 pray, the learned Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction 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. Crl.M.C.No. 4168 of 2008 3 b) C.C.260 of 2007 pending against the petitioner before the C.J.M. Kasargode, in which respondents 2 to 4 are the victims, is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioner and his sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) Judge tm