IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1026 of 2009() ------------------------------------ C.C. NO.173/2008 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVALLA. .......... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 ------------------------ 1. BABY SUNITHA, D/O. SULOCHANA N.NAIR SATHYAVILASAM HOUSE, NIRANAM VADAKKUMBHAGOM KADAPRA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. 2. P.PRAMOD KUMAR, S/O.LATE PRABHAKARAN PILLAI, SREENILAYAM HOUSE, NELLIKKAL, KOIPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. 3. THANKAMMA, W/O.LATE PRABHAKARAN PILLAI SREENILAYAM HOUSE, NELLIKKAL, KOIPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. BY ADV.MR.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PULIKKEEZHU POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- CRL.M.C.No. 1026 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to quash all proceedings in C.C. 173/2008 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvalla. The petitioners 2 and 3 are facing allegations under Section 498 (A) r/w 34 of the IPC. An affidavit is jointly filed by the defacto complainant and the accused wherein it is stated that the matrimonial dispute between the wife and husband is settled by a decree of divorce and that the wife does not want to continue legal proceedings against the husband and the mother- in-law. Therefore the modality is to be adopted as per the dictum laid down in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another [2003 (4) SCC 675]. The apex court held that in such cases the court has to find out whether there will be any purpose by permitting the prosecution to continue. The apex court also held that settlement of matrimonial disputes should be encouraged and hyper technicality should not be permitted to result in counterproductivity. In the light of the said dictum and Crl.M.C. 1026/2009 -2- applying the same to the facts of this case, the husband and wife have settled the matter amicably and they wants to live happily in a better harmonious and peaceful atmosphere. Therefore it is a fit case where the powers under Section 482 of the Crl.P.C can be invoked. Therefore the Crl.M.C is allowed and all proceedings in C.C. 173/2008 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvalla is quashed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm