IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2010 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1099 of 2010(B) -------------------------------------- (C.C. NO.7/09 OF THE C.J.M. COURT, ERNAKULAM) ........... PETITIONERS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SMT.FEBA ELIZABETH SUNNY, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.SUNNY JOSEPH, PARACKAL HOUSE,VENGALLOOR KARA, KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. SRI.JOBIN LUKE, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.LUKE P.J.,PALUVELIL HOUSE, THAMPALAKKDU KARA, KANJIRAPPALLY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.THOMAS GEORGE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. S.H.O.KADAVANTHARA POLICE STATION, KOCHI CITY. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. I.B. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 1099 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 7th day of April,2010 ORDER First petitioner is the de facto complainant and second petitioner is her husband, the accused in C.C.7/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam taken cognizance for the offences under sections 498A, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code on Annexure 3 final report. The petition is filed jointly by the husband and wife to quash the pending proceeding contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled before this court in Mat Appeal No.768/2009 evidenced by Annexure 1 compromise petition and in the light of the settlement it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Crl.M.C.1099/2010 2 petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. The offences under sections 323 and 341 IPC are compoundable. The joint statement filed by the first petitioner wife who is also the injured and the second petitioner husband and the separate affidavit filed by the first petitioner establish that the offences under sections 323 and 341 were already compounded. Though an offence under section 498A is not compoundable, as held by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675 when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution by standing on technicalities. 4. The joint statement filed by the wife and husband and Annexure 1 compromise petition in Mat Appeal 768/2009 and the affidavit filed by the first petitioner, the de facto complainant establishes that all matrimonial disputes were settled amicably. In such circumstances, it is not Crl.M.C.1099/2010 3 in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.7/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006