1.This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" for brevity).
2.The petitioner herein is the accused in L.P. No.155 of 2005 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court- IV, Kozhikode. The aforesaid case is a split up case from C.C.No.306 of 2003 on the file of the said court in which the petitioner herein was arrayed as the 5th accused. The said case has arisen from Crime No.32 of 2000 of Nadakkavu Police Station and the accused were charged for having committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 342 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant. Crl.M.C.6225/2016 2
3.The prosecution allegation is that on 2.2.2000 at 00.15 hours, the petitioner along with other accused had locked the front door of the building occupied by the 2nd respondent from outside and wrongfully restrained him .
4.The petitioner was not available for trial and the case was proceeded against accused Nos.1 to 4. By Annexure-B judgment dated 18.7.2003, the accused Nos.1 to 4 were found not guilty and were acquitted of all charges. Thereafter the disputes between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent were amicably resolved .
5.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the respondent No.2 and also the learned Public Prosecutor.
6.Annexure-C is the affidavit sworn to by the 2nd respondent wherein he asserts that he has settled the matter with the petitioner herein and he has no objection in terminating the proceedings on its basis. Both sides rely on the decision of the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Crl.M.C.6225/2016 3 Punjab ( 2012 (4) KLT 108) to advance their contentions.
7.The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that no other cases are reported against the petitioner.
8.I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made across the Bar and I have also gone through the materials on record. The offence committed by the petitioner cannot be said to be grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious impact on the society. More over, when the party respondent has settled the matter, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and the continuation of the criminal case against the petitioners would be a futile exercise. It would also put the petitioner and the party respondent to great oppression and prejudice . I am of the view that proceedings can justifiably be quashed invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code. In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure A final Crl.M.C.6225/2016 4 report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as L.P. No.155 of 2005 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court-IV, Kozhikode are quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V.
JUDGE vps