IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1075 of 2010 ---------------------------------- [CC.NO.618/2009 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD] .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 3: ----------------------------------------------- 1. MR.MAZHUKADA THAMBAN NAIR,AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.PULLUR CHERKARA KELU NAIR, RESIDING AT PULLOOR HOUSE,VAZHAKODU, PULLOOR P.O, ANANDASRAM VIA., HOSDURG TALUK & KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. MR.PULLUR CHERKARA KELU NAIR,AGED 65 YEARS,S/O.KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, RESIDING AT PULLOOR HOUSE,VAZHAKODU, PULLOOR P.O, ANANDASRAM VIA, HOSDURG TALUK & KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. LAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,, W/O.PULLUR CHERKARA KELU NAIR, RESIDING AT PULLOOR HOUSE,VAZHAKODU, PULLOOR P.O, ANANDASRAM VIA., HOSDURG TALUK & KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.SOJAN MICHEAL, MR.P.G.SURESH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. SREEDEVI.M, AGED 24 YEARS, D/O.(LATE)MAVILA KUNHAMBU NAMBIAR, RESIDING AT THODUKULAM HOUSE, PARAVANADUKAM P.O, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, R2 BY ADV. MR.P.S.NISHAL. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.1075 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 29th March 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.618/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's court, Kasargod taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A and 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, on Annexure-II final report. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Crmc 1075/10 2 2. Second respondent the wife appeared through a counsel and filed Annexure-III affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably due to the intervention of mediators and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes were settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Affidavit filed by the second respondent, de facto complainant, Crmc 1075/10 3 establishes that all matrimonial disputes were settled amicably with the petitioners. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.618/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's court, Kasargod is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.