IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2008 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3955 of 2008() ------------------------- ( CC.52/2007 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, NEDUMANGAD) .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 3: ----------------------------------------------- 1. NAZEER, NAZEER MANZIL, VATTAKULAM DESOM, ARUVIKKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 2. NABEESA BEEVI, NAZEER MANZIL, VATTAKULAM DESOM, ARUVIKKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. 3. JAMEELA BEEVI, NAZEER MANZIL, VATTAKULAM DESOM, ARUVIKKARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.R.V.SREEJITH. RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SHANEEFA BEEVI, D/O.NADEERA BEEVI, SHAFI MANZIL, KAVUMMOOLA, KARIPPOORU VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI FOR R1, ADV. SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH FOR R2. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3955 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of October 2008 O R D E R Petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 498A read with 34 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. That crime in turn was registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the second respondent/de facto complainant before the learned Magistrate and referred to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners are the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively of the second respondent/de facto complainant. 2. In the course of the proceedings, the parties have settled their disputes. Petitioners have come before this court along with the second respondent through their counsel to apprise this court of the fact that the parties have willingly and voluntarily settled all their outstanding disputes and that the second respondent has compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioners against her. The spouses - the first petitioner and the second respondent are now living together harmoniously, it is submitted. In these circumstances, the learned counsel submit that the continuance of the prosecution is unnecessary and irrelevant. Crl.M.C.No.3955/2008 2 Powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in B.S.Joshi vs. State of Haryana [AIR 2003 SC 1386] may be invoked to quash the proceedings against the petitioners notwithstanding the fact that the offence under Section 498A I.P.C is not compoundable, submits the learned counsel. 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the prayer. I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case that this is an eminently fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in B.S.Joshi (Supra) must be invoked to bring to premature termination the prosecution against the petitioners. 4. In the result, a) This Crl.M.C is allowed. b) C.C No.52/2007 pending before the learned J.F.C.M-II, Nedumangad against the petitioners in which the second respondent is the de facto complainant is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, the proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C, if any, pending against the petitioners and their sureties shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr Crl.M.C.No.3955/2008 3 Crl.M.C.No.3955/2008 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.C.No. of 2008 ORDER 09/07/2008