IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2011 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1079 of 2011() ------------------------------------- C.C.NO. 589/2009 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, PERAMBRA .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ABDUL MANAF,S/O.MOIDEEN, AMARAD, KATTIPPARA P.O., THAMARASSERY. 2. MARIYAM, W/O.MOIDEEN AMARAD, KATTIPPARA P.O., THAMARASSERY. 3. MOIDEEN,AMARAD, KATTIPPARA P.O., THAMARASSERY. 4. NAFEESA, D/O.ASEES, IYYAKKUNNUMMAL, IYYAD P.O., UNNIKULAM VIA. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS. -------------------------------------------------- 1. SEENATH, D/O.M.P.ABDU RAHIMAN, KANDIKUNNUMMAL, NANMANDA P.O, NANMANDA VIA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BALUSSERY POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.R.SREEJITH R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAIBY PAUL THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1079 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused 1 to 4 in Crime No.393 of 2009 of Balussery Police Station and C.C.No.589 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Perambra for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “the Code”). That case was registered on a complaint preferred by respondent No.1, wife of first petitioner. Petitioners seek to quash proceeding against them on the strength of a settlement reached with respondent No.1. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, respondent No.1 and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Learned counsel for petitioners and respondent No.1 have confirmed the settlement and authenticity of signature of respective parties in the joint statement which is countersigned by the counsel as well. The joint statement reveals that the parties have settled the dispute. 3. Since the dispute is purely personal to and between petitioners and respondent No.1 and that parties have filed a joint statement amicably settling the dispute, I am inclined to allow the request. Crl.MC No.1079/2011 2 Resultantly this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure-A1, final report in Crime No.393 of 2009 of Balussery Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against petitioners in C.C.No. 589 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Perambra are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks