The petitioners herein are the three accused in C.P.No.99 of 2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur. Crime in the said case was registered under Sections 341 and 323 IPC r/w Section 34 IPC on the complaint of one Muneer Rahman. The complainant Muneer Rahman was a juvenile on the date of the alleged incident. The offence being triable by the Special Court in such a circumstance, committal proceeding was initiated against the petitioners. There was also a counter case in connection with the same incident. Pending the two proceedings the parties came to terms amicably and reported settlement in court. As the victim of offence in this case was juvenile on the date of the incident the composition was not accepted by the court below. However, the composition was recorded in the other case and, the accused in the counter case were acquittal under Section 320(8) Cr.P.C. Now the de facto complainant Muneer has become major. Annexure-A4 birth certificate shows that his date of birth is 29.09.1995. Now he is competent to take Crl.M.C.No.6517 of 2014 2 decisions of his own. He is the 3rd respondent herein. Another person who sustained simple injury in the incident, is the 4th respondent in this proceeding. It is none other than the father of the juvenile. Now the parties have filed a joint petition of amicable settlement, and it is accepted by the court. Crl.M.A.No.11511 of 2014 is accordingly allowed. I find that the parties have really come into terms amicably and the counter case stands closed on composition. Here composition before the court below is not possible because the matter is now before the committal court. In such a situation orders will have to quash by this court under Section 482 Cr.P.C, quashing the prosecution. I am well satisfied that there is real and genuine settlement between the parties. The de facto complainant, Muneer who has now attained majority has taken voluntary decision of his own, settling the whole dispute, and he has no grievance or complaint now. I find that continuance of prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose, and will do harm and hardship to both sides. It would also be inappropriate to continue the prosecution when the counter case stands closed on composition.
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The prosecution against he petitioners in C.P.No.99 of 2014 of the Judicial First Crl.M.C.No.6517 of 2014 3 Class Magistrate Court, Kodungallur will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution. The bail bond, if any, executed by the petitioners will stand discharged.
P. UBAID, JUDGE.
AS