IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2666 of 2009()
1. P.GOVINDHAN, S/O.CHIRUKANDAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, (CRIME NO.78/2008
For Petitioner :SRI.ALAN PAPALI
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :27/08/2009
O R D E R
M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
--------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2666 of 2009
--------------------------
ORDER
Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.
535/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class
Magistrate’s Court, Hosdrug, taken cognizance on
Annexure-I final report for the offences under Sections
120B, 109 and 379 of Indian Penal Code. First
respondent is the defacto complainant. Prosecution case
is that petitioner, after obtaining tender to cut and
remove 7791 Cashew trees and 190 Forest trees from the
property of the first respondent in R.S.No.260/141-A-1
at Pilantholi-Nidumba Block, which was taken on lease
from the Government, with the connivance and knowledge
of accused 2 to 4 and as a result of the conspiracy,
illegally cut and removed 51 Casuarina trees and 2
kattukadukka trees valued at Rs.1,76,988/- and thereby
committed theft, the alleged offences. This petition is
filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure
contending that subsequently first respondent agreed to
settle the dispute after forfeiting the security
CRMC 2666/09 2
deposit towards the loss caused and as evidenced by
Annexure-II communication sent to the petitioner,
security deposit of Rs.4,21,650/- was forfeited and
Annexure-III communication shows that the security
deposit, which is higher than the loss incurred by the
first respondent, was forfeited and the Investigating
Officer was informed the factum of settlement by the
first respondent and in such circumstances, in the
interest of justice, the case is to be quashed.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were
heard.
3. The allegation against the petitioner and the
other accused is that pursuant to the conspiracy, they
cut and removed trees worth Rs.1,76,988/-, which do not
come within the ambit of the agreement entered into
between the petitioner and first respondent. Annexures-
II and III establish that security deposit of
Rs.4,21,650/- was forfeited, even though the loss
sustained by the first respondent was only
Rs.1,76,988/- and due to the settlement, first
respondent informed that they have no intention to
CRMC 2666/09 3
proceed with the case.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent submitted that in view of the settlement,
they have no objection for quashing the proceedings.
Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the
statement taken establishes that there was a
settlement. In such circumstances, it is not in the
interest of justice to proceed with the prosecution.
Petition is allowed. C.C.No.535/2009 on the file
of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Hosdrug as
against the accused is quashed.
27th August, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv