IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4910 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.585/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMANGALAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SHERIYAR K, S/O. MUHAMMED IQBAL, KANNARAMBATH HOUSE, NALLALAM P.O., CHERUVANNUR AMSOM, NALLALAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE DIST. 2. SHAMSUDHEEN K, S/O. ABDUL RAZAK, VADAKKEEDAN HOUSE, KEEZHUPARAMB AMSOM, PATHANAPURAM DESOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. ABDUL LATHEEF K.P., S/O. KUNHUMUHAMMAD, THAZHUPPIL PARAMBIL HOUSE, KEEZHUPARAMB AMSOM, PATHANAPURAM DESOM, MALAPPURAM DISTRIC. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. C.K. PRAKASAN, S/O. GOPALAN,PUNATHIL MEETHAL HOUSE, POST KUTTIKKATTUR, VELLIPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE DIST. 2. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEVAYUR POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. GIKKU JACOB. ADV. SRI.SAKIR.K.H. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.4910 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of January, 2009 ORDER The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Sec.380 read with Sec.34 IPC. The crux of the allegations against them is that they had committed theft of certain machineries which belonged to and were in the possession of the 1st respondent herein. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The trial has commenced; but has not been completed yet. 2. At this juncture, the petitioners, along with the 1st respondent, have come to this Court to apprise this Court of the fact that the disputes between the parties have been settled amicably and the 1st respondent/victim has compounded the offence under Sec.380 IPC alleged against the petitioners. Crl.M.C. No.4910 of 2008 -: 2 :- Notwithstanding the fact that the offence under Sec.380 IPC is not compoundable, the composition may be accepted and invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in Madhan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 AIR SCW 2287); Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I. (2008 (3) KLT 769 (SC)) and Manoj Sharma v. State (2008 (4) KLT 417) the premature termination of the proceedings may be brought about, it is prayed. 3. I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that this is an eminently fit case where composition can be accepted and the premature termination of the proceedings effected as enabled by the dictum in the three cases referred above. 4. I take note of the fact that the dispute is one which is purely private and personal between the parties and no issues of public interest or public justice are involved. 5. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. (b) C.C.No.585/07 pending before the learned JFCM, Kunnamangalam, in which the petitioners are the accused and the 1st respondent is the victim/de facto complainant is hereby quashed. Crl.M.C. No.4910 of 2008 -: 3 :- (c) Needless to say, the proceedings, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties under Sec.446 Cr.P.C. shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge