IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT SATURDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2007 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 3184 of 2007() ------------------------- CC.1153/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHAVAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.2 & 3 ---------------------------- 1. CHAKKARAMAKKIL LONAPPAN VINCENT, S/O C.K.LONAPPAN MASTER, CHAKKRAMAKKIL BHAVAN, P.O.PALUVAL, TRICHUR, PIN-680522. 2. CHINNAMMA VINCENT, CHAKKRAMAKKIL BHAVAN, P.O.PALUVAL, TRICHUR, PIN-680522. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA RESPONDENTS: DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------------- 1. LITTY, D/O LONAPPAN, MALYEKKAL HOUSE, ARIMBOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION- REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3184 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of December, 2007 O R D E R The petitioners, who face allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C., have come to this Court with a prayer that the prosecution against them may be quashed in as much as they have settled the disputes with the first respondent/defacto complainant and the said respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by them. Though ample opportunity has been given to the petitioners to ensure that a joint statement is filed to bring to the notice of the court such composition, no statement has been filed so far. There is absolutely nothing available before the court now to come to the conclusion that there has been settlement and composition of the first respondent. The prayer in this Crl.M.C. cannot hence be allowed. 2. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed. The dismissal of this Crl.M.C. will not fetter the rights of the petitioners to make fresh Crl.M.C.No. 3184 of 2007 2 application along with the first respondent, if the matter has actually been settled. (R. BASANT) Judge tm