IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 7TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3993 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.542/2008 OF JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO. 235/2008 OF KOODAL POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA ................... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2: ------------------------------------------------------- 1. AJI JOHN VARGHESE, AGED 30 YEARS, BRIGHT LAND VEEDU, NIRATHUPURA KOODAL VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SOOSAN, BRIGHT LAND VEEDU, NIRATHUPURA KOODAL VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI. RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN SRI. R. RANJITH RESPONDENTS / DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND STATE : ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JIJI, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.ROSAMMA MATHAI, KUNNATHETHU VEEDU, PAMBINI, CHITTAR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3993 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 29th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and first respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.542/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A3 final report filed in Crime No.235/2008 registered under Annexure-A1 FIR, based on Annexure-A2 complaint filed by the first respondent before Judicial First Class Magistrate and sent for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Crmc 3993/2010 2 Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably with the first respondent. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed a joint petition with the petitioners stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably subsequent to the registration of the case and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Joint statement filed by the first respondent wife, the de facto complainant along with petitioners, the accused establish that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and now she has no subsisting Crmc 3993/2010 3 grievance against the petitioners. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675), when matrimonial disputes were settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and proceed with the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.542/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Pathanamthitta is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.