Petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C. No. 1735/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg. Crime in the said case was registered under Sections 323 and 326 IPC on the complaint of one Sudheesh. The said Sudheesh is the 2nd respondent in this proceeding. Petitioner now seeks orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing the prosecution on the ground that he and the complainant have amiably settled the dispute out of court. The 2nd respondent has filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the dispute with the accused, and that he has no grievance or complaint now. In so many decisions, the Honourable Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash prosecution, if the parties have really settled the dispute amicably out of court, and continuance of prosecution will not serve any purpose. In this case, I am well satisfied that the Crl.M.C.. No. 6099/2014 2 parties have really settled the dispute. Continuance of prosecution will not serve any purpose, because, in the circumstances of amicable settlement, the defacto complainant and the material witnesses will not, in any manner, support the prosecution. Thus, continuance of prosecution will not serve any purpose, other than wasting the precious time of the court. In the result, this Cr.M.C. is allowed. Prosecution as against the petitioner in C.C. NO. 1735/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg, will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and the petitioner will stand released from prosecution. The bail bond, if any executed by the petitioner will stand discharged.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE sd // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE