IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2154 of 2009()
1. VISWAMBHARAN, MANKUZHIVEETTIL,
... Petitioner
2. ANOOP, MANKUZHIVEETTIL,
3. VENU, KATHANAPARAMBUVEETTIL,
4. GOPALAN, KANAKKASSERIL VEEDU,
5. RAMACHANDRAN, ELAKUDIPARAMBIL,
6. RAMANAN, SAROJINI NIVAS,
7. MANOJ, MANNUKUZHIYILVEETIL,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. SARADHA, KALATHIPARAMBIL VEEDU,
For Petitioner :SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.
For Respondent :SRI.R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :26/08/2009
O R D E R
M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
--------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2154 of 2009
--------------------------
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.176/2004 on
the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court,
North Paravur, taken cognizance for the offences under
Sections 143, 147, 447, 427 and 506(i) read with
Section 149 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-II final
report. This petition is filed under Section 482 of
Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings
pending before the Magistrate contending that in view
of the settlement arrived at between the petitioners
and respondents 2 to 4, it is not in the interest of
justice to further prosecute the petitioners.
2. Respondents 2 to 4 appeared through a counsel
and filed separate affidavits stating that they have
already settled the disputes with the petitioners.
3. Prosecution case, as seen from Annexure-II
final report, is that petitioners formed themselves
into an unlawful assembly with the common object of
committing house trespass and causing damages to the
CRMC 2154/09 2
property of the first respondent and in furtherance of
the common object, on 29.1.2004, committed house
trespass and intimidated respondents 2 to 4 and thereby
committed the alleged offences.
4. Affidavits filed by respondents 2 to 4
establish that there was a settlement of the disputes
with the petitioners. When the offences alleged against
the petitioners are purely personal in nature as
against respondents 2 to 4 and all the disputes were
settled between them, as held by the Apex Court in
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19),
it is not in the interest of justice to continue the
prosecution, when, ultimately, consequent to the
settlement, possibility of a successful prosecution is
very bleak.
Petition is allowed. C.C.No.176/2004 on the file
of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, North
Paravur as against the petitioners is quashed.
26th August, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv