IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2011 / 24TH POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 5018 of 2010 ------------------------- ( SC.298/2008 of ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD CRIME NO. 121 /2007 OF NEMMARA POLICE STATION. ) PETITIONER/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------ JYOTHI, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.GOPI, PALLATH VEEDU, MATTUPPARA, NEMMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED 1 & 2 AND STATE ------------------------------------------------- 1. ASHOKAN, S/O.THEETHU, AYINAMPADAM, NEMMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. PARVATHY, W/O.MANIKANDAN, AYINAMPADAM, NEMMARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV. MR. M.K. PUSHPALATHA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: lk THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.5018 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January, 2011. ORDER The defacto complainant in S.C.No.298 of 2008 of the court of learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Palakkad is the petitioner before me, requesting to quash Annexure-B, final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against petitioner Nos.1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 in the said case. That case was registered on a complaint preferred by the petitioner. Gist of the allegation is that respondent No.1 promised to marry her and under cover of that promise, persuaded her to have sexual intercourse with him. It is further alleged that respondent No.2 was an aid in that act of respondent No.1. Petitioner conceived from respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 resiled from his promise. Hence the complaint and registration of the case. Investigating agency submitted final report alleging offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Now the matter is pending trial before the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge. In the meantime the matter is settled between petitioner and respondent No.1. It is stated that petitioner is been married to respondent No.1 and Annexure-C is the photocopy of certificate of marriage. Annexure-D is the compounding petition filed by petitioner and respondent Nos.1 and 2. Petitioner therefore prays that the proceedings against respondent Nos.1 and 2 may be quashed. Crl.M.C.No.5018/2010 2 2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor confirmed that parties have settled the dispute and accordingly, respondent No.1 married petitioner and they are now living as husband and wife. 3. Now the matter is amicably settled between parties and petitioner is married to respondent No.1. Continuance of proceedings would only mar the relationship they have. There is no possibility of a successful termination of the prosecution. In the circumstances I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed and Annexure-B, final report in Crime No.121 of 2007 of Nenmara Police Station against respondent Nos.1 and 2 and all proceedings against them in S.C.No.298 of 2008 of the court of learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Palakkad are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks