IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4563 of 2010 --------------------------------- [C.C. NO.2331/2005 OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM] ................. PETITIONER: ------------------- BALAN PILLAI.R., AGED 56, S/O. LATE RAGHAVAN PILLAI, PANANGATTU HOUSE, KAIRALI ROAD, KRRA -4, EROOR SOUTH, THRIPUNITHURA, (FROM JYOTHIS, HOUSE NO.8/361, EROOR WEST, THRIPUNITHURA, PIN -682 306. BY ADVS. SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR, SRI.N.AJITH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SREEKUMARI AMMA, W/O. BALAN PILLAI.R., PANANGATTU HOUSE, KAIRALI ROAD, KRRA-4, EROOR SOUTH, THRIPUNITHURA, (FROM JYOTHIS, HOUSE NO.8/361, EROOR WEST, THRIPUNITHURA, PIN – 682 306. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.R. VENUGOPAL, R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J. PANICKER. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4563 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 18th November, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.2331/2005 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam, for the offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. They are husband and wife. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit Crmc 4563/10 2 stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and second respondent is living along with the petitioner cordially and in such circumstances, the case is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675), when matrimonial disputes were settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes and she is residing with the husband. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the Crmc 4563/10 3 prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.2331/2010 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj. Crmc 4563/10 4