IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2701 of 2009() -------------------------------------- C.C.NO.967/2003 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II, ERNAKULAM. .......... (CRIME NO.86/2003 OF ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM) ...... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- BAIJU, SON OF MARCOSE, AGED 32, AIKKARAKKUDIYIL HOUSE, JANAKEEYA ROAD, VADUTHALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. MR.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND CW1: ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.86/2003. 2. MARY, WIFE OF JOY, AGED 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOLLAMPARAMBIL VADUTHALA DESOM, CHERANELLOOR VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DITRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2701 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.967/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Ernakulam, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 447, 427, 506(ii) and 294 (b) of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-II final report. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that in view of the composition with the second respondent and settlement of all the disputes, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit to the effect that there was a complete settlement of the disputes and she has no objection for quashing the case. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor CRMC 2701/09 2 were heard. 4. Except the offences under Sections 506(ii) and 294(b) of Indian Penal Code, the other offences are compoundable. When affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that there was composition of all the disputes, as held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19), it is not in the interest of justice to continue with the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.967/2003 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Ernakulam as against the petitioner is quashed. 9th September, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv