IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2010 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 262 of 2010 ------------------------------------- CC.429/2009 of JFCM, ALATHUR .......... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2: 1. VISWANATHAN, S/O.RAMACHANDRA IYER, AGED 50 YEARS, ROSHINARADHAMANGALAM, KANNAMBRA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. LALITHA, D/O.RAMACHANDRA IYER, AGED 46 YERAS, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN RESPONDENTS/STATE /COMPLAINANT: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADAKKANCHERRY POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. 3. N.T.N. VENKITALAKSHMI,D/O.N.T.NARAYANAN, AGED 41 YERAS, SREE LAKSHMI, OLD VILLAGE NENMARA, CHITTUR TALUK. BY PUBLICPROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR FOR R1 & R2 ADV. SMT.P.G.BABITHA FOR R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.262 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are the accused and third respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.No.429/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Alathur, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-3 final report. Petitioner is the husband and third respondent his wife. Second petitioner is the sister of the first petitioner. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure to quash the cognizance taken and the proceedings pending before the Magistrate contending that entire matrimonial disputes between the parties were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Third respondent appeared through a counsel and filed a joint petition, along with the petitioners, stating that consequent to the settlement of entire matrimonial disputes, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution and to give a CRMC 262/10 2 quietus to the family disputes, it is necessary to quash the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, third 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 between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, standing on technicalities. Joint statement filed by the third respondent wife, along with the petitioners, the husband and the sister-in-law, establishes that there was settlement of all the matrimonial disputes. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.429/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Alathur is quashed. 9th April, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv