IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2010 / 2ND POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4906 of 2010 --------------------------------------- LP.193/2005 of JFCM-I, PATHANAMTHITTA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SHIBU MATHEW, S/O. MATHAI, VATTAYATHIL CHARIVU PARAMBIL, OONNUKAL P.O., CHENNEERKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND SRI.T.NIKLAVU RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: 1. ANU K.JOY, KARTHELIL HOUSE, KARUVATTA P.O., HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA, FROM KOCHUMURIYIL, OONNUKAL P.O., CHENNERKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 121. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 001. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SHAJI FOR R1 SRI.RAJESH KOSHY FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V.PRAMOD FOR R2 & R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4906 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused and first respondent, the injured defacto complainant, in C.P.No.51/2004, now pending as L.P.No.193/2005, on the file of Judicial First class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure- 5 final report. Petitioner is the husband and first respondent, the wife. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Annexure-3 order of Family Court, Thiruvalla in O.P.No. 381/2006, consequent to the settlement, is also produced. CRMC 4906/10 2 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that petitioner married her on 11.6.2000 and a child was born on 10.6.2001 and while they were living together, the marital relationship got strained which lead to several litigations and subsequent to the registration of the case, entire disputes were settled and consequent to the settlement, she does not intend to proceed with the case further and she is not having any subsisting grievance against the petitioner and in such circumstances, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Prosecution case, as is seen from Annexure-5 final report, is that on 12.3.2004 at about 8.30 p.m., petitioner inflicted injuries on the first respondent with a knife and thereby committed the offence. Affidavit filed by the first respondent CRMC 4906/10 3 establishes that entire disputes were settled amicably. The offences alleged against the petitioner are purely personal in nature against the first respondent. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19) and B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), when the offences alleged are purely personal in nature against the first respondent and first respondent has settled all the disputes amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. L.P.No.193/2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta is quashed. 23rd December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv