IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2199 of 2009 ---------------------------------- [CC.NO.977/2008 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, ATTINGAL] .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 & 2: --------------------------------------------- 1. AYOOB, AYANIMOOTTIL HOUSE, ULIYADUTHARA, CHEMBAZHANTHI, ANANDISWARAM. 2. ABOOBACKER, AYANIMOOTTIL HOUSE, ULIYAZHATHURA, CHEMBAZHATHI, ANANDISWARAM. BY ADVS. MR.S.M.PREM, SMT.K.P.SANTHI, MR.P.K.NIJOY, SMT.NISHA G.THARAMAL. RESPONDENTS/ STATE & COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. KHURAISHIA, VANDIPATHUVILAKAM, ARALUMOODU, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI, R2 BY ADV. SMT.C.PRABITHA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2199 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 17th September 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are accused in C.C.977/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal taken cognizance on Annexure-III final report, for the offences under Sections 323 and 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that there was a complete settlement of the dispute with second respondent, the de facto complainant and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed Crl.M.A.4002/2009 jointly with the petitioners stating that in view of settlement of all the disputes the case may be quashed. Annexure-II compromise petition filed before the Family court, Nedumangadu establish that there was a complete settlement of all the disputes and second respondent CRMC 2199/09 2 has agreed to withdraw the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Offences alleged against petitioners are matrimonial offence. When Annexure-II compromise petition filed before the Family court establish that there was complete settlement of all the disputes and joint petition filed by second respondent with petitioners establish that in view of the settlement, second respondent is not intending to proceed with the case. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and cause hurdles in the settlement of the matrimonial dispute. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. C.C.977/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj. CRMC 2199/09 3