IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 12TH OCTOBER 2009 / 20TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3158 of 2009 --------------------------------------- CC.98/2009 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: JOY VARGHESE, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O LATE VARGHESE, CHENNIKKARA HOUSE, THADIKKADAVU P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.K.V.BHADRA KUMARI RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SHARLET JOSEPH, AGED 28 YEARS, D/O LATE P.J.JOSEPH, PUNNEKKATTU HOUSE, PALLURUTHY P.O., EDAKOCHI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR FOR R1 BY ADV. SRI.GEO PAUL FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3158 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused and second respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.No.98/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 498A, 506 (i), 294(b), 448 and 323 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-II final report. Second respondent is the wife of the petitioner. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that in view of the settlement of the disputes between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to continue with the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed Annexure-IV joint statement stating that the entire matter has been settled between the parties. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. CRMC 3158/09 2 4. Annexure-II final report shows that petitioner is alleged to have committed the matrimonial offences. Annexure-IV joint statement filed by the second respondent shows that there were proceedings before the Family Court for divorce as well as proceedings before the Magistrate's Court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act apart from this case and they have mutually agreed to settle all the disputes. In view of the settlement of the disputes, as held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), it is not in the interest of justice to continue with the prosecution. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. C.C. No.98/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam is quashed. 12th October, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv