IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 805 of 2011() ------------------------ PETITIONER: --------------- K.M.ASHRAF, AGED 55, S/O.MOHAMMED, CHETTIKKATTIL, KOLLAMKUDI HOUSE, EDATHALA, ALUVA. BY ADV. SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF SRI.V.K.SIDHIQUE SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA SRI.SREEKANTH C.NAIR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ALUVA. 2. GEETHA VELAYUDHAN, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.VELAYUDHAN, MOUNDAPPADATH, ERUMATHALA P.O., CHUNANGAMVELI, ALUVA. ADV. SRI.SHAJI THANKAPPAN FOR R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: ADV SMT M K PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.805 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 17th day of March, 2011 ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No. 3368 of 2008 of Aluva Police Station and C.P.No.54 of 2010 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva for offences punishable under Secs.506(i) and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.3 (i)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case arose on a complaint preferred by second respondent alleging that on 15.12.2008 at about 5p.m on the side of canal road petitioner criminally intimidated him, used obscene words and intentionally insulted him in public view calling caste name. Petitioner seeks to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached with the second respondent. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for petitioner and second respondent have confirmed the settlement. Counsel for second respondent also confirmed authenticity of Annexure-A4, affidavit of the second respondent where the fact of settlement is stated. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instruction has submitted that parties have settled Crl.M.C.No.805 of 2011 -: 2 :- the dispute. 2. The offence is purely personal to and between petitioner and the second respondent. That dispute is settled. There is no reason why proceeding should continue. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.3368 of 2008 of Aluva Police Station and proceeding against petitioner in C.P.No.54 of 2010 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva are quashed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-