The petitioner herein is the 8th accused in S.T. No. 2425/2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ottappalam. The offences involved are under Sections 143, 147, 447 and 427 IPC. Crime in the said case was registered on the complaint of one Govindan, who is the 2nd respondent herein. The said Govindan is not an eye witness. He happened to prefer the complaint on the basis of information passed by one Chandran. Now, the 8th accused seeks orders quashing the prosecution against him on the ground that he and the defacto complainant have come to terms amicably out of court. That he has not compounded the offence with others is not a ground to deny relief to the 8th accused, if the settlement reported is acceptable. The defacto complainant, Govindan has filed affidavit to the effect that he has settled the whole dispute with the petitioner herein, and he has no complaint or grievance. The Crl.M.C.. No. 4556/2014 2 only eye witness cited by the prosecution is one Chandran. He has also filed affidavit to the effect that he had not seen the petitioner herein anywhere at the scene of occurrence. It was on his information, Govindan preferred complaint. Now, the only eye witness says by way of affidavit that he had not seen the petitioner herein anywhere. There is an amicable settlement now, between the defacto complainant and the petitioner herein. The petitioner seeks orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C. because, the offences under Sections 143 and 147 IPC are not compoundable. In the nature of the allegations in the final report and F.I.R., I find that orders quashing the prosecution against the petitioner herein will not affect the prosecution as against the others. No doubt, the material witness will not incriminate the petitioner herein during trial in view of the amicable settlement arrived at out of court. In such a situation, prosecution as against the petitioner can be quashed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will get a job under dying in harness scheme, and if the prosecution continues, he will he denied the said job. I find that in the above circumstances, the prosecution against him can be Crl.M.C.. No. 4556/2014 3 quashed.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Prosecution as against the petitioner herein in S.T. No. 2425/2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ottappalam will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and the petitioner will sand 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