IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4783 of 2010() ------------------------------- CC.736/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VADAKARA CRIME NO.571/2010 OF VADAKARA POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- 1. MAHESH, S/O.KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 32 YEARS, AYYADATHIL HOUSE, VILLAPILLY, VADAKARA TALUK. 2. KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 63 YEARS, DO. DO. 3. JANU, W/O.KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 53 YEARS, DO. DO. 4. BINDU, D/O.KUNHIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 35 YEARS, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.571 OF 2010 OF VADAKARA POLICE STATION.) 2. RAJANA, D/O.PADMANABHA KURUP, AGED 24 YEARS, KIZHAKKAPABALLYIL HOUSE, ERINAGANNOOR P.O., VADAKARA. R2 BY ADV. SMT.JYOTHI JOSEPH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4783 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 7th day of December,2010 ORDER Petitioners are the accused and the second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.736/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vadakara taken cognizance for the offences under section 498A and 406 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A final report. First petitioner is the husband and second respondent the wife. Petitioners 2 and 3 are the parents and fourth petitioner is the sister of the first petitioner. Petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings before the learned Magistrate contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequently to the settlement, it is not in the interest of Crl.M.C.4783/2010 2 justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes with the petitioners were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. As held by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. The affidavit filed by second respondent establishes that entire disputes were settled amicably. Hence it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.736/2010 on the file Crl.M.C.4783/2010 3 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vadakara is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006