IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2010 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 721 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CC.1440/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, HOSDURG. CRIME NO.429/2009 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- B.K. KUNHIKRISHNAN, S/O. CHIRUTHA B., BANTHALAMKUNNU, MADIKKAI VILLAGE, P.O.MADIKKAI, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. RAJANI P.K., D/O. K.T. NARAYANAN, NEAR VISHWABHARATHI CLUB, VELESWARAM, P.O.HARIPURAM, AJANUR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.S. SIVAKUMAR. R2 BY ADV. SMT.AMBILY. K. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.721 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 3rd March 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.1440/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-I final report. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled with the second respondent wife and in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared Crmc 721/10 2 through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled and consequent to the settlement she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. Petitioner has also produced a copy of the agreement entered into between the petitioner and second respondent, whereunder disputes were settled including M.C.115/2009 and O.P.162/2009 pending before Family court, Kasargod. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Affidavit filed by second respondent corroborated by Annexure-II agreement establishes that there has been complete settlement of the matrimonial disputes between petitioner husband and second respondent wife. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and Crmc 721/10 3 others v. State of Haryana and another (2003 (4) SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes an settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, standing on technicalities, when consequent to the settlement there cannot be a successful prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.1440/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.