IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST APRIL 2009 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2099 of 2006() ------------------------- CC.71/2005 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONERS: ACCUSED NO.1: --------------------------------- BASANT M. PANDE, S/O. MOHANCHANDRA PANDE RESI.AT 3, BRAHMANAD, ROW HOUSE, PHASE NO.5, GODHBUNDER ROAD, AZAD NAGAR, THANE (WEST) MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA-607, M/S.AKAI CONSUMER ELECTRONICS INDIA LTD.,A CO.REG.WITH REG.CO.,HAVING SHIVASHISH GROUND FLOOR, ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD, MUMBAI. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECURTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADDL.R2: 2. P.K.VENUGOPAL, S/O N.K.PILLAI, AGED 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT 7/674 C, JEWEL HARMONY HOUSE, KAKKANAD P.O., KOCHI – 682 030. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 1.1.2008 ON CRL.MA.NO.6332/07 IN CRL.M.C.NO.2099/06) ADDL.R3 TO R5 3. MR.MURALI, REGIONAL MANAGER, M/S AKAI CONSUMER ELECTRONICS INDIA LIMITED, COMPANY REGISTERED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 27, KASTOORBA GANDHI MARG, N.DELHI AND ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFCE IB NO.18, PRATAP NAGAR, N.DELHI, OSMANPURA, AURANGABAD, MAHARASHTRA AND PRESENTLY ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT 2-B, 2ND FLOOR, ISLAND CASTLE, OPP.YMCA, CHITTOOR ROAD. 4. MR.PRATAP MENON, BRANCH ACCOUNTANT, -DO- -DO- Crl.MC.No. 2099 of 2006() 2 5. MR.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, BRANCH MANAGER, -DO- -DO-. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26.3.09 ON CRL.MA.NO.668/09 IN CRL.M.C.NO.2099/06) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI C.M.KAMMAPPU FOR R1 ADV. SRI.K.R.MOHANAN FOR R2 SRI.P.T.GIRIJAN FOR R3 TO R5 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/04/2009, ALONG WITH CRMC NOS. 152 OF 2009 & CRMC NO. 225 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.3946/06 IN CRL.M.C.NO.2099/06 //DISMISSED// 1.4.09 SD/-M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, J. ----------------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.Nos.2099/2006 & 152 & 225/2009 -------------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF APRIL, 2009 O R D E R Heard both counsel appearing for the petitioners and for respondents. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. Separate affidavits are filed in these three petitions by the 2nd respondent, who is the defacto complainant in C.C.Nos.71/2005 and 105/2005 pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, wherein it is averred that the matter in dispute has been settled between the parties out of court and agreed not to proceed further in view of the settlement between the petitioners and respondents. 3. The Apex Court in the decision reported in Joshy v. State of Haryana (2003(2) KLT 1062(SC)), Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008(3) KLT 769(SC)) and Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008(3)KLT 19(SC)) held that criminal proceedings involving non- compoundable offences can be quashed by accepting the terms of compromise reached between the rival parties, if the question CRL.M.C.Nos.2099/06 & 152 & 225/09 -2- involved in such disputes is purely of a personal nature by exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court envisaged under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. It is also held that technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way of court's power to quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences, where the dispute is compromised between rival parties. In the present case, after hearing both counsel, I am convinced that the matter has been settled between rival parties as averred in the separate affidavits filed by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant in the above cases. Therefore, the compromise is recorded and these petitions are allowed. The proceedings against the petitioner in Crl.M.C.No.2099/2006 now pending before the Court of C.J.M., Ernakulam as C.C.No.71/05 is quashed. So also, the proceedings against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.Nos.152/2009 and 225/2009 pending before the Court of C.J.M., Ernakulam as C.C.No.105/05 is also quashed. The Crl.M.Cs. are allowed accordingly. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn