IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 6TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3518 of 2010() ------------------------------------ CC.858/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, PUNALUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 2 ----------------------------------------- SABOORA BEEVI, W/O.NOOR MOHAMMED, NAJEEM MANZIL, EEYAMKUZHI, VILAKUPARA, AYYIRANELLOOR. BY ADV. SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G RESPONDENT(S): STATE/DEFACTO OF COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SHYNI, D/O.SHAKE ABDUL KHADER, SHYNI MANZHIL, KUMARAMKARIKKOM, KULATHURPUZHA P.O. KULATHUPUZHA, PIN-691310. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REKHA C.NAIR R2 ADV. SRI.N.MANU THAMPI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3518 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 28th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the second accused in C.C.858/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Punalur taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and first accused, the husband of the second respondent. Petitioner is the mother of the first accused. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, second respondent has no subsisting grievance Crmc 3518/10 2 against the petitioner. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that the petitioner is her mother-in-law and first accused is her husband and entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and under the settlement she had agreed to withdraw all legal proceedings initiated against both the accused and therefore, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioner and her son, the first accused. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State Crmc 3518/10 3 of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, second respondent, de facto complainant has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.858/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Punalur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.