IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2008 / 1ST ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3560 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO. 182/07 OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION CC.733/2007 OF JFMC, KOTHAMANGALAM .................... PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. SHAHANA, AGED 24 YEARS D/O. MUSTHAFA, MOOKKADA HOUSE MUDICKAL, MARAMPILLY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY RESPONDENTS/STATE & ACCUSED: -------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SALAM @ ASLAM, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL KHADER NADAPADAYIL HOUSE, CHERUVATTOOR, IRAMALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK. 3. KAREEM, AGED 42 YEARS, PULLAYAM HOUSE CHERUVATTOOR, DO. DO. 4. RAHMATH, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O.ABDUL KHADER NADAPADAYIL HOUSE, CHERUVATTOOR, DO. DO. 5. KUNJATHUMMA, AGED 64 YEARS, W/O. ABDUL KHADER DO. DO. 6. JESIYA, AGED 27 YEARS, W/O. ABDUL KHADER JEELANI INCHAKUDI HOUSE, ADIVAD, KOTHAMANGALAM. 7. ABDUL KHADER, NADAPADAYIL HOUSE, CHERUVATTOOR IRAMALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB ADV. SRI.M.V.JOY FOR R2-R7 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3560 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is the defacto complainant in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498A I.P.C. against her husband. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The accused in the case are the husband of the petitioner, i.e. the second respondent herein and his relatives, i.e. respondents 3 to 7. The case is pending before the court below. 2. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner/defacto complainant and respondents 2 to 7 have come before this Court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to apprise the court of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents have been settled amicably and that the petitioner has compounded the offences allegedly committed by all the respondents. A copy of the agreement executed between the parties is produced as Annexs. 2 and 4. Crl.M.C.No. 3560 of 2008 2 The spouses have put an end to the matrimonial tie on mutually acceptable terms. The respondents 2 to 7 have entered appearance through counsel. The counsel for respondents 2 to 7 asserts that the matter has been settled amicably between the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioner vouches for the identity of the defacto complainant and confirms that the disputes have been settled between the parties and the offence has been compounded by the petitioner. 2. Notice given to the learned Prosecutor. The application is not opposed. 3. I am satisfied from the facts and circumstances of this case that there has been a genuine and voluntary settlement of the disputes between the spouses and the petitioner has compounded the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. allegedly committed by respondents 2 to 7. If legally permissible, the settlement can be recognized and premature termination of the proceedings can be brought about. 4. The offence under Section 498A I.P.C. is not legally compoundable and the composition cannot be accepted under Section 320 Cr.P.C. But the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decision in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386). Crl.M.C.No. 3560 of 2008 3 The said decision is authority for the proposition that at times the interests of justice may transcend the interests of mere law and in such circumstances the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. cannot be reckoned as a fetter on the sweeping powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to act in aid of justice. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the help of the dictum in B.S. Joshi can be invoked and the proceedings against the petitioner brought to premature termination. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. b) C.C. No. 733 of 2007, pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kothamangalam against respondents 2 to 7, in which the petitioner is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, proceedings, if any, pending against the respondents/accused and their sureties shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. (R. BASANT) tm Judge Crl.M.C.No. 3560 of 2008 4