IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1212 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.155/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TIRUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 8 ------------------------------------------------------ 1. UMMAR, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED @ BAPPUTTY, NADUVILAPADIYEKKAL HOUSE, KAINIKKARA DESAM THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR TALUK. 2. MUHAMMED @ BAPPUTTY,AGED 79 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, NADUVILPADIYEKKAL HOUSE, KAINIKKARA DESAM, THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR TALUK. 3. ABOOBAKKER SIDHIKK, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED @ BAPPUTTY, NADUVILPADIYEKKAL HOUSE, KAINIKKARA DESAM, THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR. 4. ASHRAFF, S/O.MUHAMMAD @ BAPPUTTY, NADUVILPADIYEKKAL HOUSE,KAINIKKARA DESAM, THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR. 5. SAINABA, AGED 64 YEARS, W/O.MUHAMMAD @ BAPPUTTY, NADUVILPADIYEKKAL HOUSE,KAINIKKARA DESAM, THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR TALUK. 6. LAILA, AGED 31 YEARS, W/O.ASHARAFF, NADUVILPADIYEKKAL HOUSE, KAINIKKARA DESAM, THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR TALUK. 7. SAFFIYA, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.KUNJALY, NADUVILPADIYEKKAL HOUSE, KAINIKKARA DESAM. THRIPPANGODE AMSOM, TIRUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.P.G.SURESH Crl.M.C.NO.1212/2010 2 RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MAIMUNA, AGED 31 YEARS, D/O.HYDER VALAKKATH VALPPIL HOUSE, NOW RESIDING AT THRIPPANGODE DESAM, KAINIKKARA AMSOM, TIRUR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.1212 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == Dated: 17.05.2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are the husband of the de facto complainant and relatives of the husband, are the accused in C.C.No.155 of 2006 on the file of the J.F.C.M, Tirur for an offence punishable under Sec. 498A r/w 34 I.P.C. 2. In the light of the subsequent settlement of the dispute between the marital parties, the petitioner has approached this Court by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Having regard to the resolution of the disputes between the marital parties, continuance of the criminal prosecution against the petitioners is an avoidable irritant. 3. Eventhough the offence under Section 498 A I.P.C. is not compoundable, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386), the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked by this Court to bring about premature termination of the prosecution. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. C.C.No.155/2006 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Tirur, shall stand quashed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE). sj