IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1797 of 2009() ------------------------------------- (C.C.435/08 OF JFCM II COURT, CHERTHALA) ....... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- ISMAIL KUNJU, AGED 44 YEARS, JUBEENA MANZIL, MANNANCHERRY MURI, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.E.RAFEEK RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THANKAMMA BHASI, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O. BHASI, VENKANIYAKKALAVEEDU, OMAYOORKARA, KOTHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SMT. HUMERA MOHAMED ALI R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No.1797 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 9th day of June,2009 ORDER Petitioner is the accused in C.C.435/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Cherthala. Case was taken cognizance on the complaint filed by first respondent. The case against the petitioner is that he committed offences under section 420,465,468, 471 of IPC. The allegation is that with the intention to cheat first respondent, while first respondent was employed in Soudi Arabia promising that a supermarket is to be started in Soudi and relatives of first respondent could be employed therein, petitioner received Rs.10 lakhs in four instalments and inspite of the promise he did not start any supermarket and did not give any employment. When the first respondent sought repayment of the amount he issued a cheque dated 4.3.2007 for Rs.10 lakhs drawn in his account maintained at Mattakkara Branch of State Bank of Travancore and when the cheque was presented, it was dishonoured for the reason that the signature differs and thereby petitioner committed the offences under Crl.M.C.1797/2009 2 section 420, 465,468,471 IPC. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contending that subsequently the dispute between the petitioner and the first respondent were amicably resolved and though offences is not compoundable under section 320of Code of Criminal Procedure, first respondent is not intending to proceed with the case and in such circumstance the case is to be quashed. 2. Along with the petition Annexure II joint agreement executed by first respondent and the petitioner is produced. It establishes that in respect of the same transaction O.S.103/2007 was instituted before the Sub Court and all the disputes were settled amicably and first respondent had agreed not to prosecute this case. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in view of the settlement between the petitioner and the first respondent it would only be a futile exercise, if evidence is to be recorded and in such circumstance, the case is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent also submitted that the first respondent has resolved the disputes with the petitioner and she is not intending to proceed with the case and therefore the case could be quashed. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted the same. Crl.M.C.1797/2009 3 4. The materials produced before the court establish that the disputes between the petitioner and the first respondent were amicably settled and even the civil suit instituted for realisation of the amount was settled. In such circumstance, no fruitful purpose will be gained by undergoing the ordeal of a trial except waste of the valuable time of the court. As the offence is purely of personal nature and it is settled, in the interest of justice, C.C.435/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Cherthala is quashed. Petition is disposed accordingly. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006