Kerala High Court
Moidheen vs Abdul Jaleel on 14 October, 2014
Author: P. Ubaid
Bench: P.Ubaid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
TUESDAY,THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014/22ND ASWINA, 1936
Crl.MC.No. 4945 of 2014 ()
---------------------------
CC 67/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, MUVATUPUZHA
CRIME NO. 2220/2013 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
=====================
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------
MOIDHEEN, AGED 65 YEARS
S/O. ANTHRU, PEZHANGACHALIL HOUSE, MANARI P.O.
MULAVOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA.
BY ADV. SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN
RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ABDUL JALEEL, AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. SAIDMUHAMMED MOULAVI, SRAMBIKKAL HOUSE, PAYIPRA
MANARAI P.O., MULAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 673.
2. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.AJEESH K.SASI
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. P. MAYA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-10-2014, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. NO. 4945/2014
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. NO. 67/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE
COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
MUVATTUPUZHA
ANNEXURE B THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN IN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT/DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT SIGNIFYING THE FACTUM OF SETTLEMENT OF THE
DISPUTES
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
NIL
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE
SD
P. UBAID, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 4945 Of 2014
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of October, 2014
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C. No. 67/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Muvattupuzha. Crime in the said case was registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, on the complaint of one Abdul Jaleel, who is the 1st respondent in this proceeding. The accused now seeks orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing the prosecution on the ground that he and the defacto complainant have settled the dispute amicably out of court. Practically, what is reported is composition. When composition with permission or without permission is possible, under Section 320 Cr.P.C., the parties will have to approach the trial court, and have the composition recorded. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture, expressed concern that the trial court will insist on the presence of the accused. No doubt, the decision of this Court in Y.P. Baiju v. State of Kerala and Others [2007(4)KLT 1082] will have Crl.M.C.. No. 4945/2014 2 to be followed by the trial court.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is closed, with direction to the parties to approach the trial court for composition, under Section 320 Cr.P.C.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE
sd
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE