IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4642 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 147/2006 OF KUNNAMANGALAM POLICE STATION CC.528/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMANGALAM .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: --------------- 1. P.P.AYYUB, S/O.MUHAMMED, PULIKKAM PARAMB HOUSE, POOVATTUPARAMB, KOZHIKODE. 2. RAMLA, D/O.MUHAMMED, PULIKKAM PARAMB HOUSE,POOVATTUPARAMB, KOZHIKODE. 3. SAFIYA, D/O.MUHAMMED, DO.DO. 4. PATHUMMA, W/O.MUHAMMED, DO.DO. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANJAY SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. C.V.BUSHRA, D/O.ABDURAHMAN.C.V., KUTTYCHATHAN MAKKIL HOUSE ERIMALA NAIRKUZHI, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.P.K.NIJOY FOR R1 R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4642 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C. The first petitioner is the husband, petitioners 2 and 3 are the sisters- in-law and the 4th petitioner is the mother-in-law of the first respondent. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police after due investigation. Trial has not commenced yet. 2. At this juncture, the petitioners and the first respondent have come before this Court to apprise this court of the fact that they have settled the disputes and the first respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. The spouses have resumed harmonious cohabitation, it is submitted. In these circumstances the prosecution against the petitioners has become irrelevant and unnecessary. Powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in B.S. Joshi v. Crl.M.C.No. 4642 of 2008 2 State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386) may be invoked to bring to premature termination this unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution, submits the counsel for the petitioners. 3. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor, who does not oppose the prayer for quashing of proceedings. The first respondent has entered appearance through counsel. She, along with the petitioners, has filed a joint application for composition duly counter signed by their respective counsel. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the first respondent pray, the learned Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination the unnecessary and irrelevant prosecution against the petitioners. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. b) C.C. No. 528 of 2006, pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kunnamangalam, in which the petitioners are the Crl.M.C.No. 4642 of 2008 3 accused and the first respondent is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending against the petitioners and the sureties shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) Judge tm