IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3424 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.642/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMANGALAM .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------- 1. MUSTHAFA, S/O. METHALERI ATHAMMU, METHALERI HOUSE, KANNATTIKKULAM, BEHIND KOLATHARA BUS STOP, KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 2. BEEVI, W/O. METHALERI ATHAMMU, METHALERI HOUSE, KANNATTIKKULAM, BEHIND KOLATHARA BUS STOP, KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 3. SAINA BA, D/O. METHALERI ATHAMMU, METHALERI HOUSE, KANNATTIKKULAM, BEHIND KOLATHARA BUS STOP, KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 4. PATHUMMABI, D/O. METHALERI ATHAMMU, METHALERI HOUSE, KANNATTIKKULAM, BEHIND KOLATHARA BUS STOP, KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 5. SIDDHEEK, S/O. METHALERI ATHAMMU, METHALERI HOUSE, KANNATTIKKULAM, BEHIND KOLATHARA BUS STOP, KOLATHARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 2. A.K. FEBINA, D/O. A.K. MARAKKAR, FEBINA MANZIL. PUTHIYAPALAM P.O. GOVINDHAPURAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT ADV. SRI.RAJAN KUDUMBATHIL FOR R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ........................................... Crl.M.C.No. 3424 of 2010 .......................................... Dated: 17-08-2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are the accused in C.C. No. 642 of 2009 on the file of the J.F.C.M. Kunnamangalam for offences punishable under Sections 498 A and 406 read with Sec. 149 I.P.C., seek to quash the proceedings against them on the ground that the marital partners have subsequently settled their disputes. 2. In the light of the subsequent settlement of the dispute between the marital partners, the petitioners have approached this Court by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Having regard to the resolution of the disputes between the marital partners, continuance of the criminal prosecution against the petitioners is an avoidable irritant. 3. Eventhough the offence under Section 498 A I.P.C. is not compoundable, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386), the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked by this Court to bring about a premature termination of the prosecution. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 642 of 2009 pending before the J.F.C.M. Kunnamangalam shall stand quashed. Dated this the 17th day of August, 2010. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE). ani/