IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 9TH OCTOBER 2009 / 17TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2997 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.198/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ERATTUPETTA C.C.431/07 OF Judicial First Class Magistrate ERATTUPETTA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 --------------------------- NISSAM MUHAMMED, S/O.ABBARKUTTY, NIZAM MANZIL (PAZHAYAMPALLIL) HOUSE, ERATTUPETTA VILLAGE, THEKKEKARA KARA. BY ADV. SRI.G.UNNIKRISHNON RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I OF POLICE, ERATTUPETTA (IN CR.NO.7/2005) REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. 2. THASNI ABDUL SALAM, TAJ MANZIL (BUNGALOW PARAMBIL) EDAKKUNNAM KARA, EDAKKUNNAM VILLAGE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SANJAY THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CRL.M.A.NO.5107/09 IN CRMC 2997/09 DISMISSED 9/10/2009 SD/-M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,JUDGE. //True copy// PA to Judge. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2997 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 9th October 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the first accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.431/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. By Annexure-II judgment, accused 2 to 4 were already acquitted. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case as against the petitioner which was re-filed when the other accused were tried, as the petitioner was then absconding, contending that in view of the order of acquittal as against the co-accused and settlement between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the proceedings. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed Annexure-III joint statement, along with the petitioner stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled out of court and in view of the settlement it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. CRMC 2997/09 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Annexure-II judgment establish that accused 2 to 4 were already acquitted after recording the evidence. Annexure-III joint statement filed by the second respondent along with petitioners, establish that there was a complete settlement of the matrimonial disputes when O.P.496/2005 was pending before Family court, Kottayam. In view of the settlement and the order of acquittal as against the co-accused, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution even if petitioner is tried. In such circumstances, as held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) when there is a settlement of matrimonial disputes, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and to proceed with the case. Petition is allowed. C.C.431/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. CRMC 2997/09 3 uj.