IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2010 / 8TH SRAVANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3051 of 2010() CC.3/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1. ABDUL MUTHALEEF, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, INCHAKKUNDU, MUPLIYAM, NOW RESIDING AT ERUMELI R.P. COLONY, KOTTAYAM-686 513. 2. SALIMA, W/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUMELI R.P. COLONY, KOTTAYAM-686 513. 3. KASIM, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUMELI R.P. COLONY, KOTTAYAM-686 513. 4. IBRAHIM, S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, KATTUPARMBIL HOUSE, KATTUNGACHIRA, IRINJALAKUDA-680 121. 5. K.S.KASIM, S/O.SYED MUHAMMED, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, INCHAKANDU, MUPLIYAM-680 303. 6. RAHIMA, W/O.KASIM, KATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, INCHAKANDU, MUPLIYAM-680 303. 7. AYISHA, W/O.NAZEER, CHEMBHOTHPARAMBIL HOUSE, ERUMELI R.P. COLONY, KOTTAYAM-686 513. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV Crl.MC.No. 3051 of 2010() 2 RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. NASEEMA @ MEHARUNNISA, D/O.MANAKULANGARAPARAMBIL MAJEED, MADAYIKONAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.C.D.DILEEP FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWICK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.3051 of 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == Dated: 30.07.2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are the accused in C.C.No.3/2009 on the file of the J.F.C.M, Irinjalakuda for offencea punishable under Sections 143,149 and 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. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. C.C.No.3/2009 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Irinjalakuda, shall stand quashed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE). sj