IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4655 of 2010() ----------------------------------- ( CRIME NO. 839/2010 IN CC.4057/2010 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA , THRISSUR DISTRICT) .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- RAJESH V.R., AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.ADV.RAVEENDRAN, VALUPPARAMBIL HOUSE, IRINJALAKUDA POST, IRINJALAKUDA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS -------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, (CRIME NO.839/2010 OF IRINJALAKUDA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT). 2. RANJITHA C.S., AGED 28 YEARS, D/O.SADASIVAN, CHALUVALLY HOUSE, CHEERAL POST, CHEERAL VILLAGE, SULTAN BATHERI TALUK, WAYANAD. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM R2 BY SRI.C.VINODKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4655 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner, the husband and second respondent, the wife, are the accused and the defacto complainant respectively in C.C.No.4057/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakuda, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-III final report. This 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 stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably, along with the other cases pending and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to CRMC 4655/10 2 continue the prosecution. 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 v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), when the matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. The affidavit filed by the second respondent wife establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.4057/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakuda is quashed. 26th November, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv