High Court Kerala High Court

Nishad vs State Of Kerala on 22 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
Nishad vs State Of Kerala on 22 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4032 of 2009()


1. NISHAD , S/O. MAKKAYI IBRAHIM,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SHEEMEEM, S/O. SULAIMAN,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. SUDARSANAN, S/O. RAJAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :22/12/2009

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

           ------------------------------------------
            Crl.M.C.NO.4032 OF 2009
           ------------------------------------------
           Dated 22nd          December 2009


                         O R D E R

Petitioners are the accused and

third respondent, the de facto complainant

in C.C.609/2003 on the file of Judicial

First Class Magistrate, Alathur taken

cognizance for the offences under Section

326 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal

Code. Prosecution case is that on the

night of 18/5/2003 at about 7.30 p.m, due

to the previous enmity, petitioners in

furtherance of their common object beat

third respondent, while he was walking

towards Kariyangadu and caused grievous

hurt to him and thereby committed the

offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal

Code. Petition is filed under Section 482

Crmc 4032/09
2

of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash

Annexure-I final report and the cognizance

taken and proceedings pending before the

learned Magistrate contending that the entire

disputes were settled with third respondent

and in view of the settlement, it is not

interest of justice to continue the

prosecution.

2. Third respondent appeared through

the counsel and filed a joint petition with

the petitioners stating that they have

settled the entire disputes and third

respondent has no subsisting grievance

against the petitioners and hence permission

is to be granted to compound the offence.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners, third respondent and learned

Public Prosecutor were heard.

Crmc 4032/09
3

4. Offence under Section 326 of

Indian Penal Code is not compoundable and

hence permission cannot be granted to

compound the offence as sought for in

Crl.M.A.6880/2009. Permission to compound the

offence sought for is rejected.

5. Annexure-I final report

establishes that offence alleged against the

petitioners is purely personal in nature as

against the third respondent. Annexure-II

joint agreement entered into by the

petitioners and third respondent establishes

that their disputes were settled amicably out

of court. Joint petition filed by

petitioners and third respondent further

establishes that consequent to the settlement

third respondent has no subsisting grievance

as against petitioners. Though offence under

Crmc 4032/09
4

Section 326 of Indian Penal Code is not

compoundable, as held by the Apex court in

Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008

(3) KLT 19 (SC) when the offence alleged

against the accused is purely personal in

nature as against third respondent and there

has been a complete settlement of the dispute

between them, it is not in the interest of

justice to continue the prosecution as

ultimately chances of a successful

prosecution is very bleak.

In such circumstances, petition is

allowed. C.C.609/2003 on the file of

Judicial First Class Magistrate, Alathur is

quashed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.