IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4602 of 2010()
1. ASHRAF K.AGED 35 YEARS,S/O. BAVA HAJI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
... Respondent
2. MANOHARAN C. AGED 43 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.HARISH
For Respondent :SMT.AMBILY (PREMKUMAR)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :10/12/2010
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
---------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO.4602 OF 2010
---------------------------------------------
Dated 10th December, 2010
O R D E R
Petitioner was originally the
second accused in C.P.5/2002 on the file of
Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-I,
Hosdurg. As he was absconding, the case
against him was split up and case against
the remaining three accused, namely,
accused 1,3 and 4, was committed. It was
taken on file as S.C.254/2002 by
Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-I),
Kasaragod. Those accused were tried for the
offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448
and 436 read with Section 149 of Indian
Penal Code. By Annexure-AIII judgment,
those accused were acquitted. The case
against the petitioner was subsequently
Crmc 4602/10
2
transferred to the register of long pending
cases. It is now pending as L.P.53/2003.
Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings
contending that in view of the acquittal of the
co-accused and settlement arrived at with
second respondent, the de facto complainant, it
is not in the interest of justice to continue
the prosecution.
2. Second respondent appeared through a
counsel and filed an affidavit stating that
entire disputes were settled amicably and
consequent to the settlement, he has no
grievance against the petitioner and therefore,
he has no objection for quashing the
proceedings.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, second respondent and learned
Crmc 4602/10
3
Public Prosecutor were heard.
4. Prosecution case is that the
petitioner along with accused 1,3, 4 and others
formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on
2/6/2001 at about 11 a.m and in furtherance of
the common object, to set fire to the furniture
shop of second respondent in C.P.VIII/158 of
Cheruvathur Panchayat, after committing
trespass set fire to the shop and thereby
caused a loss to the tune of Rs.1,50,000/- and
committed the offences. Annexure-AIII judgment
shows that after evidence, accused 1,3 and 4
were acquitted as Pws.1 to 3 including the
second respondent did not support the
prosecution case. Therefore, examination of the
witnesses was dispensed with. Annexure-AV
agreement executed by second respondent as well
as the affidavit of the second respondent filed
Crmc 4602/10
4
before this Court establishes that second
respondent has settled all the dispute with the
petitioner. In such circumstances, even if
petitioner is to be tried, there is no
likelihood of a successful prosecution. In such
circumstances, it is not in the interest of
justice to continue the prosecution.
Petition is allowed. L.P.53/2003 on the
file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s
Court-I, Hosdurg is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.
uj.