High Court Kerala High Court

Muhammed Kuhni vs Muhammed Aseem.P.V on 17 September, 2010

Kerala High Court
Muhammed Kuhni vs Muhammed Aseem.P.V on 17 September, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3606 of 2010()


1. MUHAMMED KUHNI, S/O. C.K.MUSTHAFA,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.V.NISSAR, S/O. C.K.MUSTHAFA,
3. MUHAMMED JABIR, S/O.C.K.MUSTHAFA,
4. SHOUKATH K.M., S/O UMMER,
5. AMEER.K.M., S/O. MUHAMMED KUNHI,

                        Vs



1. MUHAMMED ASEEM.P.V.,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.S.BINU

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :17/09/2010

 O R D E R
            M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
          ===========================
          CRL.M.C.No.3606    OF 2010
          ===========================

   Dated this the 17th day of September,2010

                     ORDER

Petitioners are the accused in Crime

No.334/2010 of Pazhayangadi Police Station

registered for the offences under sections

143,147,148, 323, 324 and 506(i) read with

section 149 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure I

F.I.R based on the First Information Statement

of the first respondent. The allegation in

Annexure I First Information Statement is that

on 4.8.2010 at about 9.30 p.m, when as usual

first respondent reached his tharwad house and

was talking with the relatives, at about 10.30

p.m first petitioner the brother of the elder

sister of the father of the first respondent

came there. When first respondent opened the

door and got out of the house, first petitioner

under the pretext that something is to be told

Crl.M.C.3606/2010 2

to the first respondent took him to the road.

Second petitioner, brother of the first petitioner

and the other petitioners were also present. They

warned first respondent that he shall not go to

Mayoor lodge. The third petitioner caught hold of

the hands of the first respondent and wrongfully

restrained him and beat him and kicked him.

second petitioner with some weapon cut the pinna of

his left ear. When first respondent cried and

tharwad members came there petitioners went away.

They took him to the hospital. Petitioners

thereby committed the offences. This petition is

filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that

entire disputes were settled with the first

respondent and consequent to the settlement, it is

not in the interest of justice to continue the

prosecution.

2. First respondent appeared through a counsel

and filed an affidavit stating that he and the

petitioners are close relatives and the incident

Crl.M.C.3606/2010 3

occurred when there was dispute with regard to

Mayoor lodge and the first respondent had

apprehended that petitioners would lodge a case

against him and later entire disputes were settled

at the intervention of elder members of the family

and consequently first respondent settled entire

disputes with the petitioners and has no intention

to pursue the case and therefore the case is to be

withdrawn.

3. Learned Public prosecutor on instruction

submitted that subsequently based on the wound

certificate an offence under section 326 of Indian

Penal Code is also incorporated and the case is

being investigated.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, the first respondent and the learned

Public Prosecutor were heard.

5. Annexure I F.I.R with the First Information

Statement establishes that the offences alleged

against petitioners are purely personal in nature

against the first respondent and the dispute arose

Crl.M.C.3606/2010 4

ue to a dispute regarding Mayoor lodge between

the petitioners and first respondent, who are close

relatives. The affidavit filed by the first

respondent establishes that subsequently entire

disputes were settled amicably. As held by the

Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab

(2008(3) KLT 19) when the offences alleged against

the petitioners are purely personal in nature as

against the first respondent and the first

respondent has filed an affidavit stating that the

entire disputes were amicably settled, it is not in

the interest of justice to continue the prosecution

as it will serve no purpose consequent to the

settlement.

Petition is allowed. Crime 334/2010 of

Pazhayangadi Police Station is quashed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
tpl/-

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

———————

W.P.(C).NO. /06

———————

JUDGMENT

SEPTEMBER,2006