Kannan @ Prajeesh vs State Of Kerala on 19 August, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3026 of 2008()


1. KANNAN @ PRAJEESH
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SHANI, AGED24 YEARS

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

2. AJEESH,AGED 23 YEARS

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.AJAYAKUMAR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :19/08/2008

 O R D E R
                           R.BASANT, J.
                        ----------------------
                     Crl.M.C.No.3026 of 2008
                    ----------------------------------------
             Dated this the 19th day of August 2008

                               O R D E R

The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered

alleging offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326 read

with 34 I.P.C. Altogether there are two accused persons. The

crux of the allegations is that near a football ground after one

team succeeded in the football match, there was an altercation

between the petitioners and the de facto complainant. The

petitioners allegedly attacked the de facto complainant and he

suffered grievous injuries consequent to a very personal dispute

between the petitioners and the de facto complainant.

Investigation is not complete. At this stage, the petitioners along

with the de facto complainant who has been arrayed as the

second respondent has come before this court to report that the

disputes between them have been settled and that there is no

surviving controversy between them. The second respondent

has, in these circumstances, compounded the offences allegedly

committed by the petitioners. The second respondent does not

want to continue with the prosecution. The parties in these

Crl.M.C.No.3026/08 2

circumstances pray that the matter having been settled and the

second respondent has compounded the offences allegedly

committed against him by the petitioners, his friends, the

proceedings against the petitioners may be brought to

premature termination.

2. The second respondent has entered appearance

through counsel. An affidavit duly attested by his counsel has

been filed by the second respondent to confirm settlement and

composition.

3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits

that the State has no objection against the quashing of the

proceedings invoking powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as

enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of

Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287].

4. I take note of the nature of the allegations. I take

note of the nature of the injuries which have allegedly been

suffered. I take note of the fact that the petitioners and the

second respondent are friends and neighbours. I take note of

the harmonious settlement of the dispute between the parties. I

Crl.M.C.No.3026/08 3

take note of the futility in these proceedings. In these

circumstances, I am satisfied that notwithstanding the fact that

the offence under Section 326 I.P.C is not compoundable, the

composition can be accepted and in the interests of justice

further proceedings in the crime registered against the

petitioners can be quashed.

      5.    In the result,

      a)    This Crl.M.C is allowed.

      b)    Crime No.300/2008 of Vadakkekkara police station

registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable

under Sections 323 and 326 read with 34 I.P.C on the complaint

of the second respondent herein is hereby quashed.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr

Crl.M.C.No.3026/08 4

Crl.M.C.No.3026/08 5

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.No. of 2008

ORDER

09/07/2008