IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4687 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 59/2007 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- SYAMKRISHNA KUMAR, GANGA BHAVAN, T.C. 30/1075, MOSQUE LANE, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. MALINI, D/O.SAROJA, PADMAVILASOM VEEDU, T.C. 30/1050, KAVARADI ROAD, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN FOR R2 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4687 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 498A I.P.C. He is the husband of the defacto complainant, who is arrayed as the second respondent in this case. Investigation is complete. Final report has already been filed. Cognizance has been taken. Calender case, C.C. 279 of 2007 has been registered against the petitioner. Trial has not commenced. 2. At this juncture the petitioner/accused and the second respondent/defacto complainant have come before this Court to apprise this court of the fact that the disputes between them have been settled and they have resumed harmonious cohabitation. The second respondent has appeared before court through counsel. A joint application for composition duly signed by the parties and counter signed by their counsel has been filed as Crl.M.A. 6851 of 2008. The learned counsel for the Crl.M.C.No. 4687 of 2008 2 respondent vouches that the matter has been settled and the second respondent has filed an application for composition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the second respondent pray, the learned Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386) can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against the petitioner. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. b) C.C. No. 279 of 2007, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trivandrum, in which the petitioner is the accused and the second respondent is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed. Crl.M.C.No. 4687 of 2008 3 c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioners and the sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) Judge tm