AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 240 wordsP.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
The petitioners are the accused in C.C No. 334/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court– II, Mananthavady. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioners alleging offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 354, 427, 451, 506(i) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
When this case came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire dispute between the petitioners and the victims in this case are settled out of court. Adv. Sandeep appearing for respondents no. 3 and 4 submitted that the matter is settled. The Prosecutor also submitted that the settlement is genuine.
3.Going through the materials available on record, it is discernible that, the dispute is basically private in nature and on account of settlement arrived at between the parties, no purpose would be served if the proceedings against the petitioner herein were allowed to continue. In such circumstances, the chances of a successful prosecution are very bleak. Therefore, I am of the view that going by the decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another [2012(4) KLT 108], this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked.
Hence, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C No. 334/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – II, Mananthavady is quashed.