Basheer vs State Of Kerala on 20 December, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4934 of 2010()


1. BASHEER, S/O.KHALID, KALVETHY DESOM,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MAJEED, S/O.MOHAMED, MATHILAKATH

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. JOSEPH J VAYALAT, AGED 37 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ASHIK K.MOHAMMED ALI

                For Respondent  :SRI.RENJITH THOMAS

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :20/12/2010

 O R D E R
          M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

           ---------------------------------------------
           CRL.M.C.NO.4934 OF 2010
           ---------------------------------------------
           Dated 20th December, 2010


                          O R D E R

Petitioners are the accused and

second respondent, the de facto complainant

in C.C.1829/2005 on the file of Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, taken

cognizance for the offences under Sections

447, 341 and 323 read with Section 34 of

Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A1 final

report. Petition is filed under Section 482

of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the

proceedings contending that entire disputes

were settled amicably with the second

respondent.

2. Second respondent appeared

through a counsel and filed an affidavit

stating that he has settled all the

Crmc 4934/10
2

disputes with the petitioners and he has no

objection for quashing the proceedings.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners, second respondent and learned

Public Prosecutor were heard.

4. Offences under Sections 447, 341 and

323 of Indian Penal Code are all compoundable

offences. When the ofefnces are compoundable,

it is not for this Court to exercise the

inherent powers under Section 482 of Code of

Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings.

Second respondent, the person who is competent

to compound the offence is entitled to get the

offences compounded. Learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners submitted that non

bailable warrant is pending. If the disputes

were settled and second respondent appears

before the learned Magistrate and seeks

Crmc 4934/10
3

permission to compound the offence, I do not

find that Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

will not permit the second respondent to

compound the offences. In that event it is not

necessary to insist for the presence of the

accused to grant the permission.

Petition is disposed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.