IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 2ND ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3803 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------- [C.C. NO.214/2008 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PERINTHALMANNA, CRIME NO. 77/2005 OF KOLATHOOR POLICE STATION] PETITIONER/ 1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ AHMAD KUTTY, S/O. KUNHALAN, POOVANTHODI HOUSE, VATTALOOR, KURUVA AMSOM, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I. OF POLICE, KOLATHOOR THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. KADALAI SALEENA, D/O. KUNHIPOCKER, KADALAI HOUSE, ATTIPARUTHI VILLAGE, THIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 3803 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 24th day of September,2010 ORDER Petitioner is the first accused and second respondent, his wife is the de facto complainant in C.C. 214/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class magistrate’s Court-II, Perinthalmanna taken cognizance for the offence under section 498A and 324 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that on 12.4.1993 petitioner married second respondent and thereafter demanding more dowry. Petitioner used to treat her with cruelly both mentally and physically. On 22.4.2005 at about 8.30 a.m. demanding more dowry, petitioner along with his second wife attacked second respondent by beating on her head and caused hurt and thereby committed offences under section 498A and 324 read with section 34 of Crl.M.C.3803/2010 2 Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire disputes were settled amicably. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, she is now living along with the petitioner under his care and protection and she has no grievance against both the accused and is not interested in prosecuting the case further and therefore the petition is to be allowed and the proceedings in C.C.214/2008 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court- II, Perinthalmanna is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the statement of second respondent recorded Crl.M.C.3803/2010 3 subsequently reveals that she has settled all the disputes with both the accused and second respondent is now living with the first petitioner. 5. The affidavit filed by the second respondent wife establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioner and she is now living with the first petitioner under his care and protection. The affidavit also establishes that she has also settled the disputes with the second accused, the second wife of first petitioner. As held by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of haryana 92003) 4 SCC 675), when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and proceed with the case. Petition is allowed. C.C.214/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Perinthalmanna is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006