IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1457 of 2010()
1. RAJESH, S/O.GOPALAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. MAMPAZHATHARA SALIM,
For Petitioner :SRI.B.MOHANLAL
For Respondent :SRI.C.SINOY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :22/11/2010
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C No.1457 OF 2010
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010.
O R D E R
Petitioner is the accused in C.P.No.124 of 2008 on the file of
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Punalur, now pending as
L.P.No.67 of 2009. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, to quash the cognizance taken for the
offence under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, contending that
entire disputes were settled amicably with the injured second
respondent evidenced by Annexure-III the joint petition filed by
the second respondent injured and the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second
respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
3. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner is that though offence under Section 307 of Indian
Penal Code is not compoundable in view of the decision of the
Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008
(3) KLT 19 SC), the case is to be quashed. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Manoj Sharma v. State, (2008 (4) KLT
417), considered the decision in Madan Mohan Abbot’s case and
Crl.M.C No.1457 OF 2010 2
held that based on that principle, all the offences taken
cognizance cannot be quashed and cognizance of an offence
under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code cannot be quashed. In
view of the decision of the Apex Court in Manoj Sharma’s case
the case cannot be quashed and the petition can only be
dismissed.
4. Learned counsel thus submitted that as a non bailable
warrant is pending, a direction may be issued to the Magistrate
to consider the application to be moved on the date of surrender.
When an accused surrenders and files an application for bail,
Magistrate is expected to pass orders on the application without
delay. I find no reason to believe that the Magistrate is unaware
of the provisions of law or the decisions of this court or that the
Magistrate will not act in accordance with law. Hence no direction
is warranted. Petition is dismissed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.
mns