IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3053 of 2009()
1. N.K.MUNEER, AGED 24 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. RASHID, AGED 20 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
... Respondent
2. NIKESH.T, AGED 26 YEARS,
3. NISHA.T, AGED 28 YEARS,
4. NILAKESH.T, AGED 20 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.HARISH
For Respondent :SRI.TOJAN J. VATHIKULAM
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :05/10/2009
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
===========================
CRL.M.C.No.3053 OF 2009
===========================
Dated this the 5th day of October,2009
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.222/2008
of Chandera Police Station registered for the offence
under sections 3(1)X and XI of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities )Act,1989
on recording the First Information Statement of second
respondent. The allegations in Annexure A1(a) First
Information Statement is that fourth respondent had
purchased a recharge coupon from the shop of the
accused on 4.7.2008, but the coupon did not have the
number and there was a dispute which was settled and
the money paid was returned on 5.7.2008 and thereafter
7.7.2008 at about 7.30 p.m fourth respondent went to
the shop to purchase recharge coupon and he was
scolded uttering the caste name and on hearing about
it, third respondent also went there along with the
second respondent and they were also scolded uttering
their caste name and petitioners thereby committed the
offence under Annexure A1 F.I.R. This petition is
filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure
Crl.M.C.3053/2009 2
to quash Annexure A1 F.I.R and the proceedings contending
that entire disputes with respondents 2 to 4 were settled
amicably. Annexure A2 agreement entered into by
respondents 2 to 4 with the petitioners settling the
disputes and agreeing to file affidavit before this court
was produced to establish the settlement.
2. Respondents 2 to 4 appeared through a counsel and
each of them filed separate affidavits stating that entire
disputes were amicably settled and they have no subsisting
grievance against the petitioners and in such circumstance
they have no objection for quashing the proceedings.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,
respondents 2 to 4 and the learned Public Prosecutor were
heard.
4. Annexure AII agreement along with the separate
affidavits filed by respondents 2 to 4 establish that the
entire disputes were settled amicably. Annexure A1
establish that offence is purely personal against
respondents 2 to 4. In such circumstance, 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
the prosecution.
Petition is allowed. Crime 222/2008 of Chandera
Police Station is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Crl.M.C.3053/2009 3
tpl/-
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
---------------------
W.P.(C).NO. /06
---------------------
JUDGMENT
SEPTEMBER,2006