IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3583 of 2008()
1. SREEKUMARI V.ALIAS KUMARI RAJ,
... Petitioner
2. RAJAN T.NAMBIAR, S/O.ACHUTHAN NAMBIAR,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. P.T.SHEEJISH, S/O.IBRAHIM, PALLIPPATTU
For Petitioner :SRIC.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
For Respondent :SRI.S.SHAJI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :14/10/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
Crl.M.C.No.3583 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of October 2008
O R D E R
The petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in a prosecution for
offences punishable inter alia under Sections 468 and 420 read
with 34 I.P.C. The crux of the charge against the petitioners is
that they, in furtherance of their common intention, fraudulently
issued a cheque on a cheque leaf issued to the second accused
by his Bank on an account which was closed long back. The first
accused allegedly signed the same and thus induced the de facto
complainant to part with an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-. Crime was
registered. Investigation was conducted. Final report was
submitted to the learned Magistrate and cognizance was taken
by the learned Magistrate. The matter is pending before the
learned Magistrate now.
2. At this stage, the petitioners/accused and the second
respondent/complainant have come before this court through
their counsel to report to the court that they have settled all
their outstanding disputes and the second respondent has
compounded the offences allegedly committed by the
petitioners. The second respondent has appeared through
Crl.M.C.No.3583/08 2
counsel. An affidavit duly attested by counsel has been filed by
the second respondent. It is submitted at the Bar also that the
parties have willingly and voluntarily settled their disputes and
the second respondent has compounded the offences allegedly
committed by the petitioners.
3. I am satisfied from the totality of inputs available that
the parties have willingly and voluntarily settled their disputes
and the second respondent has compounded the offences
allegedly committed by the petitioners. If legally possible and
permissible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted
and premature termination of the proceedings can be brought
about. But the offence under Section 468 I.P.C is not legally
compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel
for the contestants, in these circumstances, rightly rely on the
decision in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008
AIR SCW 2287].
4. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the State has no
objection against the quashing of proceedings.
Crl.M.C.No.3583/08 3
5. I am satisfied that the dispute is one which is purely
personal and private between the parties and that no purpose
will be served by unnecessary continuance of the proceedings.
This, I am satisfied, is an eminently fit case where powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan
(Supra) can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination
the prosecution against the petitioners.
6. In the result,
a) This Crl.M.C is allowed.
b) C.C.No.280/2005 of J.F.C.M, Tirur in which the
petitioners are the accused and the second respondent is the de
facto complainant is hereby quashed.
c) Needless to say, the proceedings under Section 446
Cr.P.C, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties
shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance
with law.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
Crl.M.C.No.3583/08 4
Crl.M.C.No.3583/08 5
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.C.No. of 2008
ORDER
09/07/2008