Loading...
Responsive image

Prakash vs The State Of Kerala on 5 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
Prakash vs The State Of Kerala on 5 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1809 of 2009()


1. PRAKASH, S/O.SOMANATHAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. VIMAL KUMAR, S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, (CW1),

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR

                For Respondent  :SRI. VINOD

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :05/06/2009

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

              ------------------------------------------
               CRL.M.C.NO.1809 OF 2009
              ------------------------------------------

                 Dated        5th    June 2009


                           O R D E R

Petitioner is the sole accused in

C.C.255/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class

Magistrate-III, Thiruvananthapuram now pending as

L.P.153/2001 on the failure of petitioner to appear.

Annexure-A final report shows that the offence

alleged is under Section 324 and 506(ii) of Indian

Penal Code and it is purely of personal nature and

committed against second respondent/complainant. The

dispute between the petitioner and second respondent

was subsequently settled between them. This petition

is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal

Procedure to quash the proceedings consequent to

settlement.

2. As the offence under Section 506(ii),

which is punishable for imprisonment which may be

extended to seven years, is not compoundable this

petition is filed to quash the proceedings.

3. Second respondent appeared through a

CRMC 1809/09
2

counsel. He has filed an affidavit stating that his

dispute with the petitioner has already been settled

and at present there is no dispute and no public policy

is effected by the settlement and he does not want

to continue with the prosecution. Learned counsel

appearing for second respondent also submitted that the

matter has been settled and second petitioner is not

intending to proceed with the case.

4. In such circumstances, when the offence

alleged against the petitioner is purely of personal

nature and the matter has been settled between the

parties, it is not in the interest of justice to

proceed with the trial and thereby unnecessarily waste

the valuable time of the court, when the prospect of a

successful prosecution is almost bleak.

In such circumstances, petition is allowed.

C.C.255/1998 now pending as L.P.153/2001 on the file

of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III,

Thiruvananthapuram is quashed.

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.

uj.

CRMC 1809/09
3

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information