High Court Kerala High Court

M/S. Dbfs Securities Ltd vs James K.George on 15 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
M/S. Dbfs Securities Ltd vs James K.George on 15 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4905 of 2010()


1. M/S. DBFS SECURITIES LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. PRINCE GEORGE,

                        Vs



1. JAMES K.GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. ROSY @ ROSE JAMES, W/O. JAMES K.GEORGE,

3. V.L.JOSEPH, S/O. LONI,

4. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL

                For Respondent  :SRI.GEO PAUL

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :15/12/2010

 O R D E R
                 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
                ----------------------------------
                  Crl.M.C. No. 4905 of 2010
                 ---------------------------------
          Dated this the 15th day of December, 2010

                             ORDER

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.902/2010 of

Thodupuzha Police Station registered under Annexure-II F.I.R,

based on Annexure-III compliant filed by the first respondent

before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thodupuzha and sent for

investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Respondents 2 and 3 are also persons who allegedly sustained

monitory loss, as per Annexure-III complaint.

2. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal

Procedure to quash the F.I.R and further proceedings, contenting

that entire disputes were subsequently settled amicably with

respondents 1 to 3 and consequent to the settlement,

respondents 1 to 3 have no subsisting grievance against the

petitioners and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to

continue the prosecution.

3. Respondents 1 to 3 appeared through a counsel and filed

separate affidavits stating that they have settled all the disputes

with the petitioners and therefore, they have no objection for

Crl.M.C. No. 4905 of 2010 2

quashing the proceedings.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,

respondents 1 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

5. The crime was registered based on the complaint filed by

the first respondent. The offence alleged against petitioners are

purely personal in nature. Affidavits filed by the respondents 1 to

3 establish that they have settled all the disputes with the

petitioners. As held by Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v.

State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC), when the offences

alleged are purely personal in nature against respondents 1 to 3

and they have settled the disputes with the petitioners, it is not

in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution against the

petitioners.

Petition is allowed. Crime No.902/2010 of Thodupuzha

Police Station registered under Annexure-II F.I.R as against

petitioners is quashed making it clear that investigation can be

proceeded against the other accused.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

ln