IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 3654 of 2006 ------------------------- CC.586/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO. 1 AND 2. ------------------------------------------------------ 1. K.MOHANAKUMARAN NAIR, S/O.P.K.KRISHNAN NAIR, SANTHINIKETHAN, NEAR NEMOM RAILWAY STATION, NEMOM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,. 2. SANTHAKUMARI AMMA, D/O.P.K.KRISHNAN NAIR, SANTHINIKETHAN, NEAR NEMOM RAILWAY STATION, NEMOM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENTS: DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SINDHU, D/O.LALITHA BHAI, LALITHA MANDIRAM, EDAKKODE, NEMOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. B.JAYASURYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: MM Crl.MC.No. 3654 of 2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE 1 COPY OF THE FIR NO.107/1999 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION DATED 11-5-1999 ANNEXURE 11 COPY OF THE COMPROMISE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND THE 1st RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ANNEXURE 111 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN O.P.(HMA) 47 OF 2000 DATED 30-4-2005 ANNEXURE 1V COPY OF THE DECREE PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN O.P. (HMA) 47 OF 2000 DATED 30-4-2005 ANNEXURE V COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 28-3-2006 RESPONDENT 'S ANNEXURES: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE MM N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3654 of 2006 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10 day of October, 2011 Order The petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in CC No.586/06 on the file of the JFCM Court-I, Neyyattinkara. Though notice was sent to the first respondent several times, it was not served on her. The learned counsel for the accused submits that all the matrimonial disputes were settled between the parties. O.P. (HMA)No.47/2000 which was pending before the Family Court, Trivandrum was disposed of on the basis of the compromise petition filed by the petitioners and the first respondent herein. The copy of the compromise petition has been produced. The learned counsel has also pointed out that the judgment in O.P.No.47/2000 was rendered based on the compromise petition filed by the parties. It is stated that they mutually consented to have the marriage dissolved and it is further stated that all the cases which arose out of the matrimonial disputes were also agreed to be settled/withdrawn as has been mentioned in Annexure II compromise petition. The learned counsel further Crl.M.C.3654/06 2 submits that the notice on the first respondent could not be served since she shifted her residence. Since the compromise petition was accepted by the learned Judge of the Family Court, I find that based on the compromise, the further proceedings in C.C.No.586/06 on the file of the J.F.C.M.Court-I, Neyyattinkara can be quashed. The certified copy of the judgment and the compromise petition have also been made available to the court for perusal. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and CC No.586/06 on the file of the J.F.C.M.Court-I, Neyyattinkara is quashed. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd Crl.M.C.3654/06 3 Crl.M.C.3654/06 4