IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 616 of 2010() ------------------------ CP.26/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, KANNUR .................... (CRIME NO.665 OF 2007 OF KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- 1. P.P. NOUSHAD, SON OF MAHAMMOOD, SAHIRA MANZIL, AZHEEKODE,KANNUR. 2. T.P. SHAMEER, SON OF MAHAMOOD, T.P.HOUSE, AZHEEKODE, KANNUR. BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER, SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH. RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31. 2. KENNATH ROBERT, S/O.ROBERT ANTONY, HOUSE NO. 82B,BURNASSERY, KANNUR, 3. HEBICK WILSON, S/O.SUNNY, HOUSE NO.110 B, BURNASSERY, KANNUR. 4. JINESH, S/O. OF AJAYAN, POOKKUDIKUZHIPPALLY, AZHEEKODE, KANNUR. Kss ..2/- ...2.... CRMC.NO.616/2010 *ADDL.R5 & R6 IMPLEADED: R5. SARWAS NAVAS @ RINKU, S/O.ASAF AMIN, RESIDING AT KANNUR AMSOM, THAYATHERU DESOM. R6. SANDEEP SHAJI, S/O. ROLAN, KAMBIL HOUE, BURNASSERY, KANNUR. (*ADDL.R5 & R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 7/04/2010 IN CRL.M.A.NO.1943/10) R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.M. KAMMAPPU R2 TO R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V. RAMKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 616 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DATED: 10th August, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 665 of 2007 of Kannur Town Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 308 and 427 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C. seek to quash the proceedings against them. The matter is now pending before the J.F.C.M-I, Kannur as C.P. No. 26 of 2009. 2. Eventhough the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 6 submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties, since the offences are non-compoundable offences, the case cannot be quashed on the strength of the alleged settlement. I am, therefore, inclined to permit the petitioners to plead for a discharge as and when the case is committed to the Court of Session. I am also inclined to permit them to file an application for discharge through their counsel. 3. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of permitting the petitioners to plead for a discharge in absentia before the Crl.M.C. No. 616 of 2010 -:2:- Sessions Court after committal . In case the petitioners file an application through their counsel, the learned Sessions Judge shall not insist on their personal appearance for the disposal of their discharge petition. The petitioners may also highlight the fact that the matter has been settled between the parties. Dated this the 10th day of August, 2010. Sd/-V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. ani. /true copy/ P.S. to Judge