IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3529 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CC.209/2009 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KALPETTA. CRIME NO.117/2002 OF MEPPADY POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED ---------------------------------- ASHRAF, S/O.MUHAMMED AGED 36 YEARS, KOLAMBIL HOUSE, KALLUMALA NEDUMBALA, KOTTAPADY AMSOM AND DESOM VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.K.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SHAREENA, D/O. MUHAMMED, AGED 30 YEARS KARIKUNNEL HOUSE, LUCKY HILL, MEPPADI POST, MOOPPAINAD AMSOM AND DESOM, VYTHIRI TALUK WAYANAD DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.J. MOHAMMED ANSAR. R2 BY ADV. MR.M.R.VIBIN. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 3529 OF 2009 =========================== Dated this the 4th day of November,2009 ORDER Petitioner is the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.209/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalpetta taken cognizance for the offence under section 498A, 342, 365 of Indian Penal Code. Second respondent was the wife of the first petitioner. Prosecution case is that their marriage was on 12.10.1997 and while they were living as husband and wife, petitioner was treated with cruelty physically and mentally and on failure of the second respondent to pay dowry as demanded petitioner abducted Muhsina their eldest daughter from the hands of the second respondent and thereafter kept the child in his custody illegally without properly giving food and thereby committed the offences. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that subsequently entire matrimonial disputes were settled between petitioner and second respondent and the marriage was also dissolved and all liabilities were discharged and Crl.M.C.3529/2009 2 in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed Annexure II affidavit to the effect that entire matrimonial disputes were settled and as per the mediation the matrimonial relationship was dissolved and second respondent has no grievance against the petitioner and she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. The affidavit filed by the second respondent establish that there was a complete settlement of all the matrimonial disputes between the petitioner husband and second respondent wife. In view of the settlement even if petitioner is to be tried, there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003(4) SCC 675) when the matrimonial disputes were settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.209/2009 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kalpetta is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- Crl.M.C.3529/2009 3 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006