IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2010 / 2ND POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 5045 of 2010() ------------------------------- CC. NO.181/2007 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -I, NEYYATTINKARA. ......... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ------------------------------------------------- 1. YESUDASAN S/O.SELVANAYAKAM, S.L.PURAM BUNGALAW, POZHANAD, OTTASEKHARA MANGALAM, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SELVANAYAKAM, S/O. YESUDASAN S.L.PURAM BUNGALAW,POZHANAD, OTTASEKHARA MANGALAM,NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KRISHNAN, S/O.SANKARAN NADAR S.L.PURAM BUNGALAW,POZHANAD, OTTASEKHARA MANGALAM,NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SPINCY MARY, D/O. SALIN MARY MATHANILAYAM, HOLY CROSS NAGAR AYIRA,KARODE ,NEYYATTINKARA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SABU SREEDHARAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.5045 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 23rd December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and first respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.181/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Neyyattinkara, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 498 A and 506(i) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-B final report. First petitioner and first respondent are husband and wife. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the Crmc 5045/10 2 prosecution. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, she has no further grievance against the petitioners and hence she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, first 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 the matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Affidavit filed by first respondent wife establishes that she has Crmc 5045/10 3 settled all the disputes with the petitioners. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.181/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Neyyattinkara is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.