IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4711 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.268/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, NEDUMANGAD CRIME NO.160/05 OF VATTIYOORKAVU POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 AND 3 --------------- 1. KIM.J.JACOB, S/O.E.J.JOSEPH, KURIATH ERAMALAYATHIL SREEKRISHNA LANE, KURIVIKKAD VATTIYOORKAVU VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. SHYLA JOSEPH, KURIATH ERAMALAYATHIL DODO. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. CHENCHO SHERIN, D/O.MOLI THOMAS N.B.3, TC.9/260 JAWAHAR NAGAR, SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.4711 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of December, 2008 ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 and 3 in a prosecution under Section 498 A r/w 34 I.P.C. Cognizance was taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. Altogether there were 3 accused persons. The petitioners are the husband and mother in law of the victim, who is arrayed as the 2nd respondent in this Crl.M.C. The 2nd accused was the father of the 1st petitioner. He is no more and has expired by now, it is submitted. 2. The petitioners and the 2nd respondent have now come before this Court to apprise this Court of the fact that all outstanding disputes between them have been settled willingly and voluntarily. They have harmoniously decided to put an end to the marital tie. The 2nd respondent has compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners. An affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent to confirm that the disputes have been settled and she has compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners. Her counsel confirms such settlement/composition. A joint application for composition, duly signed by the contestants and countersigned by their counsel, has also been produced. Crl.M.C. No.4711 of 2008 2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the 2nd respondent pray, the learned Public Prosecutor after taking instructions does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana [A.I.R (2003) SC 1386] can be safely invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against the petitioners. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C is allowed; b) C.C.No.268 of 2007 pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Nedumangad, in which the petitioners and the deceased father of the 1st petitioner are accused and the 2nd respondent herein is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed; c) Needless to say, proceedings, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C, shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- Crl.M.C. No.4711 of 2008 3