IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3493 of 2009(B) -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.103/2008 OF THE KUTTIPURAM POLICE STATION) .... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ 1. VASEEM, S/O. ABDUL MAJEED, PONNAMPARAMBATH HOUSE, KUTTIYILPADI JUNCTION, THIRUVANNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. MUHAMMED THASNEEM P.K., PERUMANNIL HOUSE, KUMARANELLUR MUKKOM, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT. 3. HAMRAZ, PUTHAN THARAYIL HOUSE, MARUTHAYOOR, PAVARATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. IHSAN K, KOTTANGODAN HOUSE, KARULAYI, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. YASIR T.C., JAMEELA'S KOTTARAM ROAD, NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.M.T.SHEEBA. RESPONDENTS/ STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUTTIPURAM POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 2. SYAMRAJ, S/O.UNNIYAPPAN, KANAKOTTU HOUSE, VELIYAMCODE, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR, R2 BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.3493 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 6th November 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in crime No.103/2008 of Kuttipuram police station. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A FIR and further proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled with second respondent. It is contended that incident occurred when petitioners and second respondent were studying in MES college, Kuttipuram and subsequently entire disputes were settled and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed Annexure-B affidavit stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and in view of the settlement, there is no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Crmc 3493/09 2 petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure-A FIR shows that the offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 323, 341 and 324 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and the offences alleged are purely personal in nature as against second respondent. When Annexure-B affidavit filed by second respondent, who is the de facto complaint and the injured establish that entire disputes were settled amicably, held by the Apex court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC) it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, especially when the major offences are compoundable offences. Petition is allowed. Crime No.103/2008 of Kuttipuram police station is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.