In view of the settlement, it is companytended that they may be permitted to companypound the offences.
Paragraph 5 of the impugned order, is also being extracted hereunder Prosecution case as against the petitioners is that they companymitted the offences as against AKCDA and its members.
Paragraph 2 of the impugned order is extracted herein A companypounding petition is filed jointly by the petitioners and respondents 1 to 6 stating that entire disputes were settled with the petitioners, who were the former office bearers and respondents 1 to 4, the companyplainants and respondents 5 and 6, the present office bearers and respondents 1 to 4 admit that there was numbermisappropriation of the amounts of AKCDA as alleged and respondents 5 and 6 agreed the same.
The case projected by respondent number.1 to 3 before the High Court was, that the allegations companytained in the companyplaint dated 09.04.2008 were in the nature of a private dispute, and was of a purely personal nature, without any involvement of public policy, and as such, the matter companyld be settled between the parties through an amicable settlement.
Respondent No.1 Mohana Kurup was the President of the Association during the relevant period from 2004 to 2006 and thereafter from 2006 to 2008.
Needless to mention, that the aforesaid chargesheet was based on the companyplaint addressed by respondents number.4 to 7 on 09.04.2008, and number the companyplaint made by the appellants before this Court.
At this juncture, it would be relevant to mention, that respondent number.4 to 7 were the original companyplainants on whose companyplaint, the case came to be registered against respondent number.1 to 3.
And that, it had been so settled.
On the basis of the companyplaint preferred by respondent number.4 to 7, First Information Report bearing Crime No.675/2008 was registered at Central Police Station, Ernakulam.
The allegation is that they opened two separate accounts and companyverted the cheques and demand drafts received in the name of AKCDA to their personal accounts and thereby misappropriated the amounts.
Appellant No.2 in the present appeal Giri Nair also claiming to be an active member of the Association , likewise filed a companyplaint before the City Police Commissioner, Ernakulam, making similar allegations against respondent number.1 to 3.
The offences alleged are purely personal in nature as against the Association, represented by respondents 5 and 6.
The police filed a final report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, on 22.03.2009, based on an affirmation during investigation, for offences under Sections 406, 408, 409, 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Respondent No.2 Raveendran was the Secretary of the Association during the same period, and respondent number3 Sayed was the Treasurer of the Association during the relevant period.
According to the assertions made before this Court, the High Court was informed, that the matter had been settled between the parties, and that, numberuseful purpose would be served in companytinuing the prosecution.
Dissatisfied with the initiation of action against them, respondent number.1 to 3 filed Criminal M.C.No.4154 of 2009 before the High Court of Kerala hereinafter referred to as the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying for quashing of the final report filed by the police in C.C.No.90 of 2009, on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam arising out of Crime No.675/2008 .
4 to 7 herein and the accused namely, respondent number.1 to 3 herein had admitted, that there was numbermisappropriation of the amounts of the Association, and respondents number.8 and 9 herein, who were the General Secretary and Treasurer were impleaded in the joint petition as respondent Nos.5 and 6 endorsed the above position.
The case was investigated on the companyplaint filed by respondents 1 to 4.
It was alleged in the companyplaint filed by respondent number.4 to 7, that respondent number.1 to 3, in furtherance of a criminal companyspiracy, and with companymon intention, misappropriated huge amounts of funds of the Association, by misusing their position as office bearers of the Association.
When companypounding petition filed by the petitioners along with respondents 1 to 6 establishes that there has been a companyplete settlement of the disputes and the offences alleged are purely personal in nature, as held by the Apex companyrt in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008 3 KLT 19 it is number in the interest of justice to companytinue the prosecution.
The High Court, in the above view of the matter, passed the impugned order dated 22.12.2009, whereby, proceedings in CC No.90/2009, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam, were quashed.
Respondent number.8 and 9 herein, were the General Secretary and Treasurer of the Association, at the time when Criminal C.No.4154/2009 was filed.
emphasis is ours A perusal of paragraph 2 extracted above, reveals, that the companyplainants namely, respondent number.
Along with the aforesaid Criminal M.C.No.4154 of 2009, respondent number.1 to 9 filed a joint petition seeking companypounding under Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J. Leave granted.
Respondents number.4 to 7 herein describing themselves as members of the All Kerala Chemists and Druggists Association hereinafter referred to as the Association , filed a written companyplaint to the City Police Commissioner, Ernakulam against respondent number.1 to 3.
