IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4383 of 2010() ------------------------------ CC.483/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PERUMBAVOOR CRIME NO.222/2010 OF KALADY POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 3 --------------------------------------- 1. JOSHY, AGED 38 YEARS,S/O. MICHEAL, KALATHIL VEEDU, THOTTAKAMKARA, MATTOOR VILLAGE. 2. MICHEAL, AGED 66 YEARS, KALATHIL VEEDU, THOTTAKAMKARA, MATTOOR VILLAGE. 3. LAISA, AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.MICHEAL, KALATHIL VEEDU, THOTTAKAMKARA, MATTOOR VILLAGE. BY ADVS. SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI SRI.SEBIN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): STATE ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALADY POLICE STATION, KALADY, ERNAKULAM. 3. SHOLLY AGED 34, W/O. JOSHY, KALATHIL VEEDU, THOTTAKAMKARA, MATTOOR VILLAGE. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J ........................................... CRL.M.C..NO. 4383 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF NOVEMBER,2010 ORDER Petitioners are accused and third respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.483 of 2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perumbavoor taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A, 323, 294B, 354 and 506(ii) read with 34 of I.P.C on Annexure A final report submitted by S.I. Of Police, Kalady. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that the entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably with the second respondent and consequent to settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue proceedings. 2. Third respondent appeared through a counsel and filed a joint statement with the petitioners stating that they have settled all the matrimonial disputes amicably and consequently third respondent has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners. Annexure 2 agreement was also produced to show that the husband and wife agreed to live together and would withdraw all the allegations raised in the complaint CRMC 4383/2010 2 before the learned Magistrate. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent and the Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Annexure I final report establishes that the offences alleged are purely personal in nature connected to matrimonial offence. The joint statement filed by the third respondent wife along with the petitioners establish that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably. Learned counsel for the petitioners and third respondent submitted that the husband and wife are living together. As held by Apex Court in V.S.Joshi V. State of Haryana (2003(2) KLT 1062), when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue proceedings standing on technicalities. As it is established that the matrimonial disputes were settled, it is not in the interest of justice to continue proceedings. 5. Petition is allowed. C.C.483 of 2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perumbavoor is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk