CHARUPADICKAL KARAKULATHU SUBAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are accused in CC No.836/2008 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Parappanangadi for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 IPC. The case went for trial and vide Annexure-II judgment, the JFCM-I, Parappanangadi found them guilty of offences punishable under Sections 323 , 324 and 326 IPC and convicted thereunder. Appeal filed against the conviction and the sentence is pending before the II Additional Sessions Court, Manjeri as Crl.Appeal No.127/2017.

(2.) The defacto complainant and the injured are respondents 2 and 3 herein. They have appeared through counsel and filed Annexures-III and IV affidavits to the effect that the matter has been amicably settled with the petitioners and that they do not have any grievance against them and that they are also willing for quashing the proceedings as against the petitioners. It is pertinent to note that the petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 are all children of Kammukkutty Haji and are brothers. All disputes between them have been amicably settled. A report to that effect has also been obtained from the investigating officer through the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

(3.) The appeal (Crl.Appeal No.127/2017) against Annexure-II judgment is still pending as the offence alleged against the petitioners is not compoundable. There is also a counter case against respondents 2 and 3 as accused, which also ended in conviction and appeal is pending from that also. However, the offences alleged in the counter case are all compoundable and hence, there is no embargo in compounding that case. However, this case cannot be compounded because offence under Section 326 IPC is there. The injuries sustained were not life threatening. Since the injured and the accused are brothers and they have settled their disputes fully and finally, it is in the interest of justice that the petitioners be permitted to quash the proceedings, in view of the settlement expressed by respondents 2 and 3.