IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 300 of 2011() ------------------------------------ CC.598/2010 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- K. JAYAN, S/O.A. KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 31 YEARS, CHAKKATTAKAL HOUSE, VAYALAMKUZHI, PERUMBALA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.JIJI RESPONDENTS/STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTING S.I. OF POLICE, BEDAKAM POLICE STATION, KASARGOD, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. M. RAJITHA, D/O.K. BHASKARAN, AGED 22 YEARS, PARAMMAL HOUSE, MUNNAD POST AND VILLAGE, KASARGOD. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K. PUSHPALATHA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.300 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of February, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.14 of 2010 of Bedakam Police Station and C.C.No.598 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that petitioner subjected respondent No.2 to cruelty demanding more ornaments. Petitioner submits that he has settled the matter with respondent No.2 and in the circumstances prayed that proceeding against him may be quashed. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has confirmed the settlement and the authenticity of Annexure-3, affidavit of respondent No.2 and Annexure-2, photocopy of the agreement of divorce dated 03.07.2010. It is seen from Annexure-3, affidavit of respondent No.2 that the dispute is settled between petitioner and respondent No.2. Since the dispute is purely personal to and between petitioner and respondent No.2 and that dispute is now settled I do not consider it necessary that the proceeding should continue further. Hence I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed. Final report in Crime No.14 of Crl.MC No.300/2011 2 2010 of Bedakam Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding in C.C.No.598 of 2010 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kasaragod against petitioner are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks