IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 15TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 293 of 2011() ------------------------ CC.737/2010 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PAYYANNUR CRIME NO.339/2010 OF PAZHAYANGADI POLICESTATION .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- MAHAROOF.C., AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. MAHAMOOD, CHINTHOL HOUSE, MATTOOL CENTRAL MATTOOL.P.O., KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL SRI.P.S.BINU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. SHUHAIB.C., AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL AZIZ, CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, MATTOOL NORTH, MATTOOL.P.O., KANNUR DIST.-670302. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ADV. SMT.BINDU GEORGE FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.293 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of February, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.339 of 2010 of Pazhayangadi Police Station and C.C.No.737 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur for offences punishable under Sections 341 and 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the Code”). Case is that on August 7, 2010 at about 9 a.m. petitioner and two other identifiable persons on account of previous enmity wrongfully restrained respondent No.1 and voluntarily caused grievous hurt to him. It is alleged that while the identifiable accused persons wrongfully restrained respondent No.1, petitioner fisted on the nose resulting in grievous hurt. Learned counsel submitted that the alleged incident occurred in consequence of a road blockade. Petitioner seeks to quash proceedings against him on the strength of a settlement reached with respondent No.1. 2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.1 and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. It would appear from the submission of learned counsel for respondent No.1 that for the injury suffered by respondent No.1, he is compensated. Though charge under Section 325 of the Code is also incorporated, allegation against petitioner is that he fisted on the nose of Crl.MC No.293/2011 2 respondent No.1. Annexure-IV, affidavit sworn by respondent No.1 shows that the matter is settled. Since the dispute between petitioner and respondent No.1 is settled, there is no possibility of a successful culmination of the prosecution. Having regard to the settlement reached between the parties and since there is no possibility of successful culmination of the prosecution, I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed. Annexure-I, FIR, Annexure-II, final report in Crime No.339 of 2010 of Pazhayangadi Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and all proceedings in C.C.No.737 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur are quashed against petitioner. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks