Babu v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/29TH JYAISHTA, 1937 Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 591 of 2015 ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CRL.A.NO. 35/2011 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT - III, MANJERI DATED 03-07-2014 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 365/2009 of J.M.F.C.-II, PERINTHALMANNA DATED 10-01-2011.
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/2ND ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------- BABU, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAN, VITHANOTTIL HOUSE, VETTATHOOR, EZHUTHALA, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.SAMSUDIN SRI.M.S.MOHAMMED ANSARY SRI.K.C.ANTONY MATHEW SRI.JITHIN LUKOSE RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT/STATE:
------------------------------- 1.
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.(CRIME NO.182/2006 OF MALATTUR POLICE STATION).
ADDL.2.M. CHANDRAN, S/O. ARAMUKHAN, MADATHIL HOUSE, VETTATHUR PO-679 326, MELATTUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
ADDL.3.JAYADEVI, W/O. CHANDRAN, MADATHIL HOUSE, VETTATHUR PO-679 326, MELATTUR (VIA), MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON CRL.M.A. NO.3359/15 DATED 19/6/2015. ADDL. R2 & R3 - BY ADV. SRI.A.M.BABU R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JIBU P. THOMAS THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K. HARILAL, J.
------------------------------------------------------ Crl.R.P. No.591 of 2015 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of June, 2015
ORDER
During the pendency of this revision filed against the conviction and sentence of the Revision Petitioner under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, the parties have settled the matter and have filed Crl.M.A. No.3360 of 2015 to the effect that the matter has been compounded. The said petition has been signed by the Revision Petitioner as well as the additional respondents 2 and 3 and their respective counsel. In the light of this, Crl.R.P. is disposed of and the judgments under revision are set aside and the composition of the offence is recorded.
2. It is needless to mention that this composition shall have the effect of acquittal of the Revision Petitioner of the offence punishable under Section 379 of the IPC within the meaning of Section 320(8) Cr.P.C. Sd/- (K. HARILAL, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge