IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 452 of 2011() ------------------------------------ C.C.NO.44/2009 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, HOSDRUG CRIME NO.426/2008 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- 1. N.P.K.ATHIK, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, S/O.SHAREEF, VELLAP, N.THRIKAPUR VILLAGE, THRIKAPUR, KASARAGOD D.T. 2. M.PUSHPARAJ, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, MARNADIYAN HOUSE, MAILATTU, N.THRIKAPUR VILLAGE, THRIKAPUR, KASARAGOD D.T. 3. SIRAJUDHEEN K.P., AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, S/O.T.P.MOIDU, K.P.HOUSE, VELLAP, N.THRIKAPUR VILLAGE, THRIKAPUR, KASARAGOD D.T. 4. AJITHKUMAR M.K., AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O.RAGAVAN C., MUNDIKOOTU HOUSE, MAILATTU, N.THRIKAPUR VILLAGE, THRIKAPUR, KASARAGOD D.T. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. V.K.ABDULNAZAR, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.LATE AHAMED P.C., R/AT NAFEESATH MANZIL, NR.CO-OPERATIVE BANK-PADNE, PADNE VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD D.T.PIN-671 121 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.SIJU MATHEW R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.452 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of February, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.426 of 2008 of Chandera Police Station and C.C.No.44 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg facing trial for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that on 20.11.2008 at about 11 p.m. petitioners assaulted respondent No.1 with iron rod. Ext.A1 is the final report submitted by the Police after investigation. Petitioners seek to quash proceedings against them on the strength of a settlement reached with respondent No.1. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor after getting instruction has submitted that the matter is settled between petitioners and respondent No.1 and that since respondent No.1 was at Bombay the Investigating Officer contacted him through mobile phone and recorded his statement where he admitted fact of settlement. 2. At the time of hearing learned counsel for petitioner and respondent No.1 submitted that petitioner paid `.25,000/- to respondent No.1 as compensation. It is seen from Annexure-A2, affidavit of respondent No.1 that the matter is settled between the parties. Annexure-A3 is the agreement executed between petitioner No.1 (on behalf of other petitioners as well) and Crl.MC No.452/2011 2 respondent No.1 as per which the dispute is settled. Since the dispute is settled between the parties it is not necessary to pursue the proceeding. Having regard to the nature of allegations and the settlement reached between the parties I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1, final report in Crime No.426 of 2008 of Chandera Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding in C.C.No.44 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg against petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks