IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2008 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4561 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1236/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. BIJU, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.BABU, KAMPIVELIKAKATHU VEETTIL, BINANIPURAM KARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 2. BABU, S/O.RAGHAVAN, 60 YEARS KAMPIVELIKAKATHU VEETTIL, BINANIPURAM KARA, PARAVUR TALUK. 3. SUJANA, W/O.BABU, 55 YEARS KAMPIVELIKAKATHU VEETTIL BINANIPURAM KARA, PARAVUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION. 2. REMYA, D/O.ASOKAN AGED 26 YEARS KADUVAPARAMBIL VEETTIL, KARUMALLOOR KARA KARUMALLOOR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK. ADDL. R3. PAULSON, S/O. VARGHESE, GOPURATHINKAL, THATTANPADI, KARUMALOOR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. REMA, W/O. ASHOKAN, KADAVUPARAMBIL VEETTIL, KARUMALOOR KARA, KARUMALOOR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 2/12/2008 IN CRL.M.A.NO.6695/08. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. SRI.GANESH G.PILLAI FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 4561 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2008 ORDER The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.498A IPC. They are the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the de facto complainant i.e., the 2nd respondent herein. The 2nd respondent has filed an affidavit to confirm that the matter has been settled with the petitioners. But it is seen that there are two more injured persons in this case. It was pointed out that they shall be impleaded subsequently. An application has been filed but so far no affidavit or joint application has been filed by the additional respondents 3 and 4 to confirm that they have settled their disputes and compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners herein. 2. Sufficient time has already been granted. The order Crl.M.C. No. 4561 of 2008 -: 2 :- was dictated on 26/11/08. It was posted again to to be spoken to as it was noted that the additional respondents 3 and 4 have not filed an affidavit as was represented at the Bench. Today when the matter comes up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the affidavits of additional respondents 3 and 4 shall be filed to confirm that they have settled their disputes. At the moment, there is nothing to show that the additional respondents 3 and 4 have settled their disputes. I am satisfied, in these circumstances, that this Crl.M.C. deserves to be dismissed. 3. This Crl.M.C. is accordingly dismissed. I may hasten to observe that the dismissal of this Crl.M.C. will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioners and respondents 2 to 4 at a later stage to file appropriate application to apprise the court of the fact that they have settled their disputes. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Crl.M.C. No. 4561 of 2008 -: 3 :-