IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 19TH DECEMBER 2008 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4972 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.3631/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, ALUVA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHANMUGHAN, S/O.NARAYANACHARI, ILLATHUPARAMBILO, KURUMASSEDRY PO. BY ADV. SRI.AYPE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KANAKAM, W/O.SHANMUGHAM, ILLATHUPARAMBIL, KURUMASSERY PO., 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.BENNY VARGHESE (THETTAYIL) FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4972 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the sole accused facing indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 498A I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a private complaint filed by the first respondent herein. Though three more accused were arrayed as accused, cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate only against the petitioner herein, who is the husband of the first accused. 2. Trial has not commenced. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner/accused and the first respondent/ complainant have come before this Court to report to this court that they have settled the disputes and the first respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner. The spouses are now residing separately and they have agreed that the matrimonial tie can be dissolved. 3. The first respondent has entered appearance through counsel to confirm such settlement/composition. An affidavit Crl.M.C.No. 4972 of 2008 2 duly attested has been filed by the first respondent to confirm such settlement. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays, the learned counsel for the first respondent does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386) can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against the petitioners. 5. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. b) C.C. No. 3631 of 2007, pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva, in which the petitioner is the sole accused and the first respondent is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioners and the sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) tm Judge Crl.M.C.No. 4972 of 2008 3