IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2009 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1696 of 2009() ------------------------------------ C.C. 203/2009 OF THE ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT THALASSERY. .............. PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- 1. PALAKAL NISHAD, S/O.KUNHIKOYA, PALAKAL HOUSE, P.O.TEMPLE GATE, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. PALAKAL NAJMA, W/O.KUNHIKOYA, PALAKAL HOUSE, P.O.TEMPLE GATE, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. KUNHIKOYA, S/O.AHAMMED KOYA, PALAKAL HOUSE, P.O.TEMPLE GATE, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.SANJAY RESPONDENT(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------- 1. SUHRABI, D/O.RAMESAN, ASEENA QUARTERS, NEAR CORINATION SCHOOL, DHARMADAM, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A. NO.2796/2009 IN CRL.M.C. NO.1696/2009 DISMISSED 05.06.2009 SD/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE TSS M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.1696 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 5th June 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are accused in C.C.203/2009 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery taken cognizance on the complaint filed by first respondent alleging that petitioners committed offence under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash all further proceedings in C.C.203/2009 stating that subsequently the disputes between first petitioner husband and first respondent wife were settled and they are now living together and in such circumstances there is no necessity to continue the proceedings. Crl.M.A.2798/2009, a petition for compounding the offence was jointly filed by petitioners and first respondent, where also factum of settlement is stated. It is contended that complaint itself was filed due to sudden anger and difference of opinion which was subsequently settled. 2. First respondent is represented by a CRMC 1696/09 2 counsel and learned counsel appearing for first respondent also submitted that the matter has been settled and in the interest of justice case is to be quashed. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that matter has been settled between the wife and husband and they are now living together. In such circumstances, as held by Supreme court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana & another (2003 (4) SCC 675) it is not in the interest of justice thwart the settlement on the technicalities and prevent the matrimonial peace. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. C.C.203/2009 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.