High Court Kerala High Court

Kalivalappil Abdulla vs State Of Kerala Represented By … on 12 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
Kalivalappil Abdulla vs State Of Kerala Represented By … on 12 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 194 of 2009()


1. KALIVALAPPIL ABDULLA, P.O. BOX NO.33873,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY INSPECTOR
                       ...       Respondent

2. CHATHANKUTTY, S/O.NADIKUTTY, AGED 44

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.SUDHISH

                For Respondent  :SRI.VINOD SIGH CHERIYAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :12/03/2009

 O R D E R
                     M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
                  -------------------------------
              CRL.M.C.NO.194 OF 2009 (B)
                -----------------------------------
         Dated this the 12th day of March, 2009

                          O R D E R

This petition is filed to quash the proceedings in

C.P.No.32/2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court II, Thamarassery. Though initially the

accused were alleged to have committed the offence under

Sections 452, 294(b), 324, 307, 506 (ii) read with 34 of the

Indian Penal Code and 3(x) of the SC/ST (PA) Act, the police

has admitted the charge after investigation only under

Sections 294(b), 324, 506 (ii) read with Section 34 of the IPC

and Section 3(x) of the SC/ST (PA) Act, 1989. This Court

directed the defacto complainant to be present and the

defacto complainant had stated before the Court that the

matter has been settled. That has been recorded on 9.2.2009.

It is submitted that the parties have sorted out the differences

and they have settled the matter out of court. There was

another case, S.C.No.1256/2006 and the accused has been

CRL.M.C.194/09 2

acquitted by the Sessions Court. It is categorically asserted

that there is no grievance for the defacto complainant against

the accused. Even the parties are prepared to forgo and

forgive the acts complained of and they wanted to live in a

harmonious atmosphere. So, taking into consideration all

these facts and applying the dictum laid done in Nikhil

Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008 (3)

KLT 769 (SC)) and Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003 (2)

KLT 1062 (SC)), it can be seen that the cause of action is

something personal and it has been amicably settled out of

court. So, applying the said principle, I am inclined to put an

end to the litigation. Therefore, invoking the powers under

Section 482, I quash all further proceedings in

C.P.No.32/2008 pending before the JFCM II, Thamarassery.

Accordingly this Criminal M.C. is allowed.





                                      M.N.KRISHNAN
                                           JUDGE

prp

CRL.M.C.194/09    3

     J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ.




——————————————————–

M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 ()

———————————————————

J U D G M E N T

———————————————————

6th November, 2008