IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2626 of 2010() ------------------------- C.C.NO.10/2010 OF J.F.C.M COURT, CHALAKKUDY (CRIME NO.31/09 OF KORATTY POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. POLLY, S/O.DEVASSYKUTTY, AGED 43 YEARS, MADAN HOUSE, NADUVATTAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE. 2. MARY, W/O.DEVASSYKUTTY, AGED 72 YEARS, MADAN HOUSE, NADUVATTAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE. 3. JOLLY, S/O.DEVASSYKUTTY, AGED 36 YEARS, MADAN HOUSE, NADUVATTAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE. 4. POULY, D/O.DEVASSYKUTTY, AGED 38 YEARS, MADAN HOUSE, NADUVATTAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE. 5. SOLLY, D/O.DEVASSYKUTTY, AGED 32 YEARS, MADAN HOUSE, NADUVATTAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SMT.MEREENA JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ELSSY, D/O.VAREED, AGED 39 YEARS, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, MURGINGOOR, MURINGOOR, THEKKUMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA. ADV. SRI.SUNIL JOSE E.V. FOR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.C.S.HRITHICK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.2626 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = == Dated: 12th day of July, 2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 5 in C.C. No. 10/2010 on the file of the J.F.C.M. Court, Chalakkudy for an offence punishable under Sec. 498A I.P.C, seek to quash the proceedings against them on the ground that the marital partners have subsequently settled their disputes. 2. In the light of the subsequent settlement of the dispute between the marital partners, the petitioners have approached this Court by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Having regard to the resolution of the disputes between the marital partners, continuance of the criminal prosecution against the petitioners is an avoidable irritant. 3. Eventhough the offence under Section 498 A I.P.C. is not compoundable, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386), the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked by this Court to bring about a premature termination of the prosecution. Crl.M.C.No.2626 of 2010 2 Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. C.C. No. 10/2010 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy shall stand quashed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE). dmb