IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4033 of 2010() ------------------------------------- CR.NO.160/2005 OF PANDIKKAD POLICE STATION C.C.614/2005 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, PERINTHALMANNA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- EBRAHIM, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. ABDUREHIMAN, PLAVILA HOUSE, VILABHAGOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KISHOR B. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. FATHIMA SUHARA, AGED 29 YEARS, D/O.KUNHIMUHAMMED, KALAKKARA HOUSE, PANDIKKAD AMSOM/DESOM, MELE ANGADI, PANDIKKAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676 521. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDIKKAD POLICE STATION, PIN-676 521. MALAPPURAM DIST. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.SHYAM PRASAD. R2 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4033 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 4th October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the accused in C.C.614/2005, now pending as L.P.33/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Perinthalmanna taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code on Annexur-B final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Pandikkad Police Station filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire matrimonial disputes with first respondent, de facto complainant were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue prosecution. Annexure-A Crmc 4033/10 2 FIR shows that Crime No.160/2005 of Pandikkad Police Station was registered based on the first information furnished by the first respondent. After investigation Annexure-B final report was submitted alleging that petitioner committed offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that the complaint happened to be lodged when difference of opinion arose between the husband and wife. Subsequently, in the mediation between the relatives of the both parties, entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement she has no grievance against the petitioner and therefore, the case is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, first respondent and learned Public Crmc 4033/10 3 Prosecutor were heard. 4. 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. Affidavit filed by the first respondent wife establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.614/2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Perinthalmanna is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.