IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1747 of 2009()
1. SOUDHA,W/O.ABBAS,MULLUNGAL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. MAJEED,S/O.ABDULRAHIMAN,ARACKAL VEEDU,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
For Respondent :SMT.P.K.RADHIKA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :01/06/2009
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
==================
Crl.M.C. No. 1747 of 2009
==================
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2009.
O R D E R
Petitioner is accused in C.C.No.246/2008 on the file of
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-V, Kozhikode, taken
cognizance on the final report submitted by Nallalam Police
after investigation based on the complaint filed by the 1st
respondent alleging offences under Sections 420, 467, 468
and 471 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure contending
that subsequent to the initiation of C.C.No.246/2008, the
dispute between petitioner and 1st respondent were
amicably settled out of court and 1st respondent received
the entire amount due to him from petitioner and he has no
grievance now and therefore the case is to be quashed.
Annexure B Affidavit of 1st respondent to the effect that he
has received the entire amount due from petitioner and he
has no grievance against petitioner and also has no
Crl.M.C.No.1747/2009
-2-
objection to quash the entire proceedings in
C.C.No.246/2009 is filed along with the petition.
2. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and and
learned Counsel appearing for 1st respondent were heard.
3. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner
submitted that the entire dispute which arose out of the
issuance of the cheque and non payment of the amount due
to 1st respondent was subsequently resolved and 1st
respondent has already received entire amount due and in
the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 AIR SCW
2287), in Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation
(2008 (3) KLT 769 SC) and in Manoj Sharma v. State (2008
(4) KLT 417 SC) and the case being only of a personal
character is to be quashed. Learned Counsel appearing for
1st respondent submitted that 1st respondent had received
the entire amount due from the petitioner and he has now
no grievance against the petitioner and the case may be
quashed.
Crl.M.C.No.1747/2009
-3-
4. Considering the nature of the offences alleged,
which is purely of personal nature on account of non-
payment of the amount due by petitioner to 1st respondent
and subsequent payment of the amount by petitioner to the
satisfaction of 1st respondent as is clear from the affidavit of
1st respondent, it would be an unnecessary waste of
valuable time of the Court if petitioner is to be tried in the
case, when the matter has already been settled between
petitioner and 1st respondent/defacto complainant. No
fruitful purpose would be achieved by continuing the
criminal proceedings. In such circumstances, in the
interest of administration of justice, C.C.No.246/2008 on the
file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-V, Kozhikode is
quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
dkr