IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4542 of 2010() ------------------------------- CC.1121/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, HOSDRUG CRIME NO. 132/2009 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. V.P.NOUSHAD, AGED 29 YEARS S/O.LATE M.MUHAMMED KUNHI, AYSHA MANZIL BEHIND MATTAMAL JUMA MASJID, P.O.ELAMBACHI, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. V.P.DAVOOD, AGD 40 YEARS S/O.LATE M.MUHAMMED KUNHI, AYSHA MANZIL BEHIND MATTAMAL JUMA MASJID, P.O.ELAMBACHI, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHANDERA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MUHSINA.T, AGED 20 YEARS D/O.ABOOBACKER, MUHSINA MANZIL, KOTTAPURAM PO, NILESHWAR VILLAGE HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN 671 341. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V.PRAMOD R2 BY ADV. SMT.SHAMSEERA. C.ASHRAF THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. -------------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.4542 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of November, 2010. O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C. No.1121 of 2009 of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Hosdurg, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498(A) r/w 34 of Indian Penal code on Annexure-1 FIR based on Annexure-2 complaint filed by the second respondent before Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Hosdurg, and send for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate stating that entire disputes were amicably settled with the second respondent. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably with the petitioners and in view of the settlement she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. The affidavits filed by the second respondent Crl.M.C No.4542 OF 2010 2 establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioners. As held by the Apex Court in B.S Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003 (4) SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C. No. 1121 of 2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Hosdurg, is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. mns