IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 962 of 2010 -------------------------------- [CC.NO.342/2009 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR] .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3: ------------------------------------------------------- 1. ANEEZ,S/O.ASSAINAR HAJI, MANAKKAD THEKKEPEEDIKAIL HOUSE, PEKKADAM, THRIKKARIPUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. 2. M.T.P.HAYARUNNISA,W/O.ASSAINAR HAJI, MANAKKAD THEKKEPPEEDIKAIL HOUSE,PEKKADAM, THRIKKARIPUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. 3. M.T.P.AMEENA,W/O.FAIZAL,MANAKKAD THEKKEPEEDIKAIL HOUSE, PEEKKADAM, THRIKKARIPUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI. RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. M.T.P.RAMSHEENA,D/O.MUHAMADHALI, ALINKEEZHIL, VELLOR P.O, THALIPARAMBU, KANNUR DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR, R2 BY ADV. SMT.P.S.PREETHA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 962 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 19th day of March,2010 ORDER Petitioners are the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.342/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur taken cognizance for the offence under section 498A read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. First petitioner is the husband and second respondent his wife. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the Magistrate contending that the entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably under Annexure II agreement. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that due to the intervention of mediators all the Crl.M.C.962/2010 2 matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, 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 are settled amicably it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. The affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.342/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- Crl.M.C.962/2010 3 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006