IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4944 of 2008()
1. MURALEEDHARAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL
For Respondent :SRI.E.A.BIJUMON
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :18/12/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 4944 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of December, 2008
ORDER
The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under
Sec.494 IPC. Cognizance has already been taken by the
learned Magistrate. Trial has not commenced. During the
pendency of the proceedings, parties have settled their
disputes. It is prayed that the composition may be accepted
and the proceedings may be quashed invoking the
extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C.
2. I am not persuaded to agree. The offence is
compoundable under Sec.320(2) Cr.P.C. The parties can get
the relief of composition by moving the learned Magistrate
under Sec.320 Cr.P.C. I find absolutely no justification in the
prayer to invoke the jurisdiction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to
quash the proceedings.
Crl.M.C. No. 4944 of 2008 -: 2 :-
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not available in India and that if the personal
presence of the petitioner were insisted by the learned
Magistrate, that would cause unnecessary difficulties and
hardship. I find no reason why such insistence must be made.
This position has been clarified beyond doubt in the decision in
Baiju v. State of Kerala (2007 (4) KLT 1082).
4. This Crl.M.C. is, in these circumstances, dismissed
without any fetter on the rights of the parties to move the
learned Magistrate under Sec.320 Cr.P.C. to accept
composition.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
Crl.M.C. No. 4944 of 2008 -: 3 :-