IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2009 / 1ST ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3073 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CC.558/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONERS/3RD ACCUSED & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SASIDHARAN NADAR, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. BHAGAVA NADAR, PUTHENVEEDU NO., OP VIII/351, VALIKONAM, UZHAMALAKKAL VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK. 2. SAILAJA, D/O. SISCILY, AGED 30 YEARS, KALAINAD KIZHAKKUMKARA PUTHENVEEDU, ARUVIKKARA P.O., -DO- VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK. BY ADV. MR.J.JAYAKUMAR MR.S.JIJI RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE --------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.SIVAKUMAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3073 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER First petitioner was the third accused and second petitioner, the defacto complainant in C.C. No.729/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Nedumangad. As first petitioner was absconding, the case as against him was split up and refiled as C.C.No.558/2009 and the remaining two accused were tried by the learned Magistrate. 2. Prosecution case is that on 18.8.1999, first accused married the second petitioner and in that wedlock, two children were born and the accused treated her with cruelty and thereby committed the offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. After recording the evidence, under Anenxure-A2 judgment, accused 1 and 2 were acquitted. It is clear from Annexure-A2 judgment that independent witnesses did not appear and CRMC 3073/09 2 second respondent, the defacto complainant and her mother, who were examined, did not support the prosecution case. This petition is jointly filed by the third accused along with the defacto complainant to quash the proceedings as against the first petitioner contending that in view of the order of acquittal as well as the settlement between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. It is clear from Annexure-A2 judgment that first accused husband and second accused were already acquitted, after recording evidence finding that the prosecution witnesses did not support the prosecution case. Joint petition filed by the parties establish that in view of the settlement, even if petitioner is to be tried, there is no chance for a successful prosecution. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) CRMC 3073/09 3 4 SCC 675), when matrimonial disputes were settled, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Interest of justice warrants quashing of the proceedings. In such circumstances, petition is allowed. C.C.No.558/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kollam as against the first petitioner is quashed. 23rd September, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv