LAWS(KER)-2014-5-37

AREEPARAMBAN ANSAR ALI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On May 13, 2014
Areeparamban Ansar Ali Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are accused in C.C. No.1065/2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram, arising out of Crime No. 217/2009 of Kondotty Police Station, registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 326, 323, 324, 506 (i) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution allegation is that on 24.04.2009, at or about 24.00 hours, the accused carrying weapon like stick, reaper, cycle chain etc., attacked the injured in connection with a football tournament. A counter case was also registered against the injured, who are arrayed as respondents 2 to 7 in this Crl.M.C., at the instance of the petitioners and the same stands quashed by this Court by judgment dated 04.12.2013 in Crl.M.C. No.5837/2013. Now, the petitioners submit that the entire dispute between the parties have been settled and in order to substantiate the same Annexure C to E affidavit sworn by the injured have been produced along with Crl.M.C., as per which the dispute between the parties have already been settled amicably and they have no intention to proceed against the petitioners. Therefore, the prayer sought in this Crl.M.C. is to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.1065/2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram.

(2.) HEARD , the learned counsel for petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 7.

(3.) THE allegation against the petitioners is for commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 326, 323, 324, 506 (i) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Now, as evident from Annexure C to E affidavits sworn by respondents 2 to 7, who are the injured persons, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the said injured persons have no intention to proceed against the petitioners. The counter case initiated at the instance of the petitioners against the said respondents has also stands quashed by the judgment of this