O R D E R

Dated this the 13th day of January, 2023 This Crl.M.C. has been preferred to quash further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-2 Final Report in S.C.No.750/2011 on the files of the IV Additional Session's Court, Thrissur on the ground of settlement between the parties.

2. The petitioner is the defacto complainant. Altogether, there are five accused. The 2nd respondent is the accused No.4.

3. The offences alleged against the accused are punishable under Sections 120 (b), 153-A, 143, 147, 148, 324, 326, 307 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act .

4. The 2nd respondent entered appearance through counsel.

5. I have heard Sri.Anand Kalyanakrishnan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Abraham Mathan, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and Smt.T.V.Neema, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

6. Even though, offence under Section 307 of the IPC is involved, the said offence is not attracted as against the 2nd respondent. Admittedly, the 2nd respondent petitioner did not use any weapon. The weapon was used by the accused Nos. 1 to 3. The prosecution allegation is that the 2nd respondent and the accused No.5 helped the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in the commiss