IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2272 of 2009 -------------------------------- (CRIME NO. 117/2007 DT. 27/2/2007 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION ON THE FILE OF ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM) .................................. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ----------------------------------- MANOJ C.ANTONY, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.C.B.ANTONY, H.NO.XXIII/35, CHURUKATT HOUSE, EDAKOCHI, KOCHI-6. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MANJULA, AGED 32 YEARS, D/O.LATE MADHUSUDANAN PILLAI, THAMARAKULATHU HOUSE, NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM. ADV. SMT.DIJI.K.DASAN FOR R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2272 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 14th August 2009 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and second respondent the defacto complainant in crime 117/2007 of Panangad police station, now pending as C.C.1637/2007 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam. Allegation against the petitioner is that he committed offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the proceedings contending that there has been a complete settlement of the disputes between the husband and wife and in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the proceedings. Under Annexure-A2 order in O.P.332/2007, Family court, Ernakulam accepting the settlement has already dissolved the marriage by mutual consent. So also under Annexure-A3 accepting the settlement, petition filed under Guardian and Wards Act was also disposed. Joint statement is also filed by petitioner CRMC 2272/09 2 and second respondent re-iterating the settlement stating that in view of the settlement the case may be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Annexure-A2 and A3 orders of the Family court and joint statement filed by petitioner and second respondent, establish that matrimonial disputes of the petitioner and second respondent were settled. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) in such circumstances, when case is settlement of matrimonial disputes, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.1637/2007 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam (crime 117/2007 of Panangad police station) is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.