Raj Anand vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2009

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Raj Anand vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2009

Bench: M.Sasidharan Nambiar

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 1798 of 2009()


1. RAJ ANAND, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. PADMAKUAR
                      ...  Petitioner
2. VIMAL V, AGED 24 YEARS,S/O. VIJAYAN NAIR
3. RAHUL MATHEW, AGED 25 YEARS,
4. VIJU V,AGED 25 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
                       ...       Respondent

2. ARUN. R, AGED 25 YEARS,

3. KRISHNAPRASAD, AGED 25 YEARS,

4. ANUROOP P.S., AGED 25 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.KANNAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :10/06/2009

 O R D E R
              M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
            ===========================
            CRL.M.C.No. 1798      OF 2009
            ===========================

       Dated this the 10th day of June,2009

                        ORDER

Petitioners are the accused in C.C.162/2007 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The offences alleged are under sections 143,147,148,149 and 324 of Indian Penal Code. Respondents 2 to 4 are the injured.

Prosecution case is that on the belief that the second respondent destroyed a flag hoisted by ABVP in Government Law College campus, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of inflicting injuries on the second respondent and armed with weapons attacked him and inflicted injuries on respondents 2 to 4 and thereby committed the offences. Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences on Annexure A1 report. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that subsequently the dispute of petitioners with respondents 2 to 4 were amicably settled and they are not intending to prosecute the case.

Crl.M.C.1798/2009 2

2. Respondents 2 to 4 appeared through a counsel and submitted that the disputes between the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4 were amicably settled and respondents 2 to 4 are not interested to further prosecute them. It is also submitted that Crl.M.A.2983/2009 is jointly filed by the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4 under section 320 of Indian Penal Code for permission to compound the offence in view of the settlement, and if the offences cannot be compounded, there is no objection for quashing the proceedings.

3. Though the offence under section 324 is compoundable the offence under section 143, 147, 148 cannot be compounded under section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure. The submission of the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4, along with the joint petition filed by them establish that the disputes were settled and even if petitioners are to be tried in the case respondents 2 to 4 are not going to give evidence in favour of the prosecution. If that be the case, there is no chance for a successful prosecution, even if the ordeal of a trial is to be undergone. It would only cause waste of the valuable time of the court, which could be used for better purpose. In such circumstance,in the interest of justice, C.C.162/2007 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed.




                                     M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
                                                JUDGE

Crl.M.C.1798/2009    3

tpl/-

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.




     ---------------------
      W.P.(C).NO. /06
     ---------------------


         JUDGMENT




     SEPTEMBER,2006

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court