IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2008 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3983 of 2008() ------------------------------------------ CC.489/2007 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,PARAVOOR .................... PETITIONER(S): 3RD ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------------ DEEPAK @ KANNAN, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.SATHIKUMARA KURUP, ELLUVILATHADATHARIKATHU VEEDU, KIZHAKKANELA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. BIJU, S/O.BABU, MANGONATHU CHARUVILA VEEDU, KIZHAKKANELA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U.NAZAR - R1 ADV. SRI.S.BIJU FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 3983 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner is the 3rd accused facing indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC. All offences are compoundable. Petitioner has secured employment in the CRPF. Continuation of the prosecution is an irritant to the prospects of such employment. The defacto complainant/victim has settled the dispute and compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner. Petitioner along with the defacto complainant has rushed to this Court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C with the prayer that the composition may be accepted and proceedings against him may be brought to premature termination. The defacto complainant is not willing to compound offences against the other co-accused. It is hence that the petitioner has come rushing to this Court. 2. I find absolutely no merit in the prayer for composition. The offences are compoundable and the composition can be urged before the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate Crl.M.C. No. 3983 OF 2008 -:2:- can accept the same. There is no valid reason for this Court to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The defacto complainant/victim can report to the learned Magistrate that the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner have been compounded. That request must be considered by the learned Magistrate. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is not able to appear before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner can certainly bring to the notice of the learned Magistrate the decision in Biju V. State of Kerala [2007(4) KLT 1082] which directs the Court not to insist on the personal appearance of the petitioner for accepting the composition by the respondent/victim. 3. I am in these circumstances satisfied that this Crl.M.C is only deserves to be dismissed. With the above observations, this Crl.MC is dismissed. 4. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb Crl.M.C. No. 3983 OF 2008 -:3:- Crl.M.C. No. 3983 OF 2008 -:4:- Crl.M.C. No. 3983 OF 2008 -:5:-