IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4481 of 2010()
1. RAISON, S/O.JOHN,
... Petitioner
2. SAREESH, S/O.HARIHARAN, AGED 31,
3. SUBHEESH, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN,
4. RAJESH, S/O.BHUVANENDRAN,
5. SHAJI, S/O.AZEEZ, AGED 23 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. NAVEEN, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR,
3. RAJI, W/O.NARAYANAN NAIR,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.R.VINOD
For Respondent :SRI.K.V.ARUN KUMAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :11/11/2010
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.4481 OF 2010
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of November, 2010.
O R D E R
Petitioners are accused in C.C.No.1694 of 2009 on the file of
Judicial First class Magistrate Court at Ernakulam taken
cognizance for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341
323, 324, 325 and 354 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-
A1 final report submitted by Sub Inspector of police Palarivattom.
Prosecution case is that on 1.4.2007 at about 8.30 p.m.,
petitioners formed in to an unlawful assembly with the common
object of causing hurt to second respondent due to previous
enmity in furtherance of the common object armed with deadly
weapons wrongfully restrained the second respondent and hit on
his face causing fracture of tooth and hit on his eye back with a
stone and when 3rd respondent’s mother tried to resist her
modesty was inserted and she was pushed on the ground and
thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the recognizance
taken contending that the entire disputes with respondents 2 and
3 were settled amicably and consequent settlement it is not in
the interest of justice to continue with the prosecution.
2. Respondents 2 and 3 appeared through a counsel and
Crl.M.C. No.4481 OF 2010 2
filed a joint statement with the petitioners stating that they have
settled all the disputes amicably consequent to the settlement.
Respondents 2 and 3 have not subsisting grievances against the
petitioners and, therefore, the proceedings is to be quashed.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
4. The Annexure-A final report shows that the offences
alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature. Joint
statement filed by respondents 2 and 3 establish that
rerspondents 2 and 3 have settled all the disputes with the
petitioners as held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot
v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC), when consequent
to the settlement there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution
and the trial would result only unnecessary waste of valuable
time of the Court, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the
prosecution.
Petition is allowed CC 1694 of 2009 on the file of Judicial
First Class magistrate Court, Ernakulam is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE
mns