IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH MARCH 2009 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1045 of 2009() ------------------------------- CC.1155/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KARUNAGAPPALLY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 5 -------------------------------------- 1. NAVAS, S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, THACHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLELIBHAGAM, KARUNGAPALLY. 2. ARIFA, W/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, THACHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLELIBHAGAM, KARUNGAPALLY. 3. MUHAMMED KUNJU, THACHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLELIBHAGAM, KARUNGAPALLY. 4. LAILA BEEVI, D/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, THACHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLELIBHAGAM, KARUNGAPALLY. 5. NAZAR, S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, THACHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALLELIBHAGAM, KARUNGAPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. NIZA, D/O. SULTHANPILLA, THEVARAYYATH THEKKETHIL, KADATHOOR.P.O, THAZHAVA. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI FOR R2 ADV. SRI.SAKIR.K.H. FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 1045 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of March, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to quash all proceedings in C.C.1155/08 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karunagappally. Petitioners are facing allegations u/s 498A r/w S.34 IPC. It is on the basis of a complaint filed by the defacto complainant. The learned counsel had produced Annexure-A2 which is an agreement. It is submitted that as per the agreement the amount has been paid and all disputes relating to the matrimonial relationship is settled between the parties. 2. Now the defacto complainant is represented by Advocate Sri. Sakir K.H. and he submits before me that the matter has been settled and the parties are living in a calm and harmonious atmosphere. When such is the situation what is the procedure to be followed is laid down in Joshi's case(B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003 (4) SCC 675). It has been held in that decision that while invoking Crl.M.C. 1045 OF 2009 -:2:- the power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. the High Court is expected to consider what will be the end result if the prosecution is permitted to continue. It is also held that settlement of matrimonial disputes should be encouraged and that hypertechnicality should not be permitted to result in counterproductivity and damage to the intention of the legislature. Now the parties have compromised the matter among themselves, having separated and they are living in a better peaceful atmosphere. There is no point in permitting the prosecution to continue. Therefore invoking the powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. I quash all further proceedings in C.C.1155/08 of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karunagappally and thus the Crl.M.C is allowed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-