IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2368 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.45/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. SIDDIQUE,S/O. ALI RESIDING AT CHEMPOTHARA VAYAL VENGERI, KOZHIKODE. 2. SHIJUIAI WRONGLY STATED AS VIJAYAN S/O.GANGADHARAN, RESIDING AT METHALEPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, KANNANKARA, CHEINNUR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURENDRAN SRI.P.A.HARISH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE RAILWAY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 3. C.RAFEEQ, S/O.MOHAMMED KOYA, AGED 39 YEARS, VALAPPADAM NILAM, KODINATTIMUKKU, OLAVANNA, KOZHIKODE. (R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN CRL.M.A.NO.3943/2008 DATED 28/07/2008) BY ADV. SRI.NIRMAL. S FOR R3 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2368 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September 2008 O R D E R The petitioners faceD indictment along with seventeen others in a prosecution for offences punishable under Section 143,144,147,148,452,341,324,326,506(ii) read with 149 I.P.C. All the other accused except accused 6,8 and 9 were available for trial. Accused 8 expired and the charge against him stood abated. The petitioners (accused 6 and 9) were not available for trial. The co-accused who faced trial were all found not guilty and acquitted as per judgment dated 28/1/2008 in C.C.No.164/2002. The case against the petitioners was split up and was refiled as C.C.No.45/08. The petitioners have subsequently entered appearance and they have been enlarged on bail, it is submitted. At this juncture, the petitioners have come to this court along with the victims/injured that is CW1 to 6. They apprise the court of the fact that the disputes between them, have all been settled amicably and that the victims have compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. Inasmuch as the co-accused have already been acquitted and inasmuch as the victims have settled the disputes and compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners, Crl.M.C.No.2368/08 2 surviving prosecution has lost its meaning and relevance. Ground realities may be taken into account. Unnecessary insistence on technicalities may be avoided and invoking the jurisdiction of the court under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287] proceedings against the petitioners may be quashed, it is prayed. All the six injured have filed affidavits before court duly countersigned by their counsel to report to this court that the disputes have been settled by the victims and that they have compounded all offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. Though some of the offences are non- compoundable, it is prayed that a lenient and realistic view may be taken and the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution may now be brought to termination invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 2. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, confirms that all the injured persons who have filed affidavits before court have settled their disputes and have compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. It is submitted that the State has no objection against premature Crl.M.C.No.2368/08 3 termination of the prosecution against the petitioners invoking the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra). 3. Acquittal of the co-accused by itself may not justify the claim for quashing of proceedings; but I am satisfied that the composition of the offence by CWs 1 to 6 reported by them by filing an affidavit before court and the confirmation of the same by the learned Public Prosecutor can certainly be reckoned as valid circumstances to justify premature termination of the proceedings by invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 4. In the result, a) This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. b) C.C.No.45/08 pending before the learned J.F.C.M-I, Kozhikode is hereby quashed. c) It is made clear that proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C if any pending against the accused and other sureties must be disposed of in accordance with law. Crl.M.C.No.2368/08 4 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out and the learned Public Prosecutor confirms that there is an error in the description of the second petitioner/9th accused in the judgment of acquittal passed by the court below. The correct name of the second petitioner/9th accused is Shijulal, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner and accepts the learned Public Prosecutor. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.2368/08 5 Crl.M.C.No.2368/08 6 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008