IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3507 of 2009() ------------------------- LP.222/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KARUNAGAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ----------------------------- 1. ABDUL JALEEL, S/O.IBRAHIM KUTTY, MANJALIPURAYIDAM, KULASEKHARAPURAM P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. BADARUDHEEN, S/O.HAMEED KUNJU, CHANGEL PADEETTATHIL, KULASEKHARAPURAM P.O., KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. IQBAL, S/O.MUHAMMED SALI, KAROOR HOUSE, NILIKULAM, KULASEKHARAPURAM P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. MR.SAKIR.K.H. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ================== Crl.M.C. No.3507 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 18th day of November, 2009. O R D E R 1. Petitioners are the accused in C.P.113/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karunagappally, now pending as L.P.222/2009, taken cognizance on Annexure-A1 final report for the offences under Sections 325, 326 and 308 and under Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. First respondent is the defacto complainant/injured in the case. Prosecution case is that on 4/11/199 in furtherance of their common intention, petitioners armed with dangerous weapons like iron rod, inflicted injuries on the first respondent due to previous enemity and thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken on Annexure-AI final report contending that as the entire disputes with the first respondent are settled, it is not in the Crl.M.C. No.3507 of 2009 -2- interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the first respondent and the Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. First respondent along with petitioners filed a joint statement stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and first respondent has no subsisting grievance as against the petitioners and therefore, the case is to be quashed. 4. The final report shows that offences alleged against petitioners are purely personal in nature as against the first respondent. Though an offence under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code is also alleged, the Wound Certificate made available by the Public Prosecutor shows that the injuries are not that much grievous, though there is a fracture on the left ring finger apart from a lacerated wound on the left side of the occipital area which is only scalp deep. In such circumstances though, ordinarily a case involving an offence under Section 308 cannot be quashed invoking the Crl.M.C. No.3507 of 2009 -3- extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, based on the settlement of the disputes between the parties, considering the nature of the injuries and the fact that due to the settlement, even if, the petitioners are to be tried, there is no reasonable chance of a successful prosecution and the trial would only result in unnecessary waste of valuable time of court. It is not in the interest of the justice to continue with the prosecution as held by the Apex Court in case Madan Mohan Abbot V. State of Punjab, (2008 3 KLT 19 (SC) ) 5. Petition is allowed. C.P.13/2006 now pending as L.P.222/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karunagappally is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE nl