IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2008 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4702 of 2008 --------------------------------- [C.C.286/2006 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ALUVA] .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- SHIBU SUKUMARAN, S/O. LATE SUKMARAN, AGED 34 YEARS, KALVAMPARA VEEDU, KURUPPANCHIRA LANE, ELAMAKARA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.SURESH JOSE. RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. MRS.SEETHA SHIBU,@ SEETH PARVATHY, AGED 26 YEARS, D/O. C.N. SUBRAMANIAN, CHERUKADU VEEDU, KANIYAMPUZHA ROAD,EROOR P.O., TRIPUNITHURA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DIST. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKLAM. R2 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB, R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.G.SUNIL. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/12/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4702 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 498A I.P.C. He is the sole accused. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police after due investigation. Calender case has been registered. Trial has not commenced. 2. At this juncture the petitioner/accused and the defacto complainant/R1 have come before this Court to apprise the court of the fact that the parties have settled their disputes and there has been a harmonious decision to dissolve the marital tie. 3. The first respondent has entered appearance through counsel. The counsel confirms that the matter has been settled. An affidavit as also a joint application duly signed by the parties and counter signed by their counsel have been filed . 4. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the first respondent pray, Crl.M.C.No. 4702 of 2008 2 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. 5. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is accordingly allowed. b) C.C. 286 of 2006, pending before the J.F.M.C.-II, Aluva against the petitioner, in which the first respondent is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioner and his sureties shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) Judge tm