Ananthu Prasad vs State Of Kerala And Anr

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.170/2020 registered at the Sooranadu Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 324 and

326 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.161/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta. The de facto complainant, at

whose instance the crime was registered, is arrayed as the 2nd respondent. Annexure-II affidavit has been filed by 2nd respondent stating that the

dispute, which was the reason for the incident and registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably and he has no subsisting grievance against the

petitioner.

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also, who, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, the

contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the dispute is settled and no public interest is involved in this matter.

Eventhough the allegation is of the accused having caused fracture to the nasal bone of the de facto complainant, using the freewheel, considering the

young age of the petitioner and the fact that the incident had occurred on the spur of the moment and is not a pre-planned, I am inclined to allow the

Criminal M.C. Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. As such, continuance of the

proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan

Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303,] there is no impediment in

granting the relief sought.

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.161/2020 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta is

quashed.