This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure ('the Code” for brevity) with a prayer to quash the

proceedings pending against the petitioners.

2.

The petitioners herein are the accused in S.C.No.358 of 2015

on the file of the Principal District & Sessions Court [Special Court for the

trial of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)

Cases], Thodupuzha. They are accused of having committed offences

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 341, 354,

294(b), 509, 447, 504 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(10) of Scheduled

Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This

case arises out of a complaint filed by the first respondent before the

court below.

3.

The 1^st respondent is the de facto complainant. The allegation

is that on 15.09.2013 at about 5.30 pm, due to the previous enmity, the

petitioners herein manhandled the 1^st respondent.

4

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted

that at the instance of second petitioner herein, a crime was registeed

against the first respondent and others and the same was taken

cognizance by the court below as S.C. No.356 of 2015. He also refers to

S.C. No.234 of 2017, wherein the petitioners herein are the accused and

the first respondent is one of the injured. According to the learned

counsel, the parties sat together at the instance of friends and well

wishers and the entire disputes have been settled. The 2^nd respondent

has expressed his intent to refrain from continuing with the prosecution

proceedings by filing Annexure-A2 affidavit. He has stated that he has no

subsisting grievance. Parties have decided to terminate the entire

criminal proceedings and to live in peace and harmony.

5.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the 1^st

respondent who submitted that the 1^st respondent is no desirous of

continuing with the criminal proceedings.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor, onstructions, submitted that

the statement of the de facto complainant has been recorded and he has

stated in clear terms that the entire disputes have been amicably

resolved.

5

7.

I have considered the submissions advanced.

8.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and

in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Apex

Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the High Court can take

note of the amicable resolution of disputes between the victim and the

wrongdoer to put an end to the criminal proceedings.

9.

The offence committed by the petitioners cannot be said to be

grave and serious having ingredients of extreme mental depravity. It

also does not appear that the offence in this case will have a serious

impact on the society. It is felt that quashing of proceedings on account

of compromise would bring about peace and secure the ends of justice.

Even otherwise, persisting with the prosecution would be nothing but a

waste of time as the prospects of conviction is bleak. Having considered

all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered view that this

Court will be well justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under

Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings.

6

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A1

complaint and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners

now pending as S.C.No.358 of 2015 on the file of the Principal District &

Sessions Court [Special Court for the trial of Scheduled Caste and

Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases], Thodupuzha are

quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

IAP

JUDGE

7

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1

TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN

S.C.NO.358/2015 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL

DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT (SPECIAL COURT FOR

THE TRIAL OF SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED

TRIBE(PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) CASES)

THODUPUZHA DATED 29.4.2014.

ANNEXURE A2

TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT DATED 24.9.2018.