IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1826 of 2009 ---------------------------------- LP.NO.43/2008 OF JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ERATTUPETTA. .................... PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- MUBASH, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.HANEEFA, ALAPPATTU HOUSE, EERAYIL KADAVU ROAD, KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY. BY ADV. MR.RAJIT. RESPONDENT/ STATE: --------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. RABIYA MOL, AGED 26 YEARS, D/O.HASSAN, KANATHIL HOUSE, NADAKKAL P.O., EERATTUPETTA VILLAGE, MEENCHEEL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JACOB, R2 BY ADV. MR.V.P.NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ================== Crl.M.C. No. 1826 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 4th day of June, 2009. O R D E R Petitioner is the husband and second respondent the wife. Based on a complaint filed by second respondent, Erattupetta Police Station registered Crime No.240/2007 for an offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. Based on the final report, congizance was taken as C.C.No.482/2007 and is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Erattupetta. It was transferred to L.P. register as L.P.No.43/2008 because of the failure of the petitioner to appear before the Court. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that subsequently there was a settlement of the disputes between the wife and husband and so the wife does not intend to prosecute the husband Crl.M.C.No.1826/2009 -2- further and therefore as held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana (2003 (2) KLT 1062 SC) the case is to be quashed. Along with the petition Annexure A3 joint petition is filed by petitioner and second respondent stating that they have resolved all the disputes and second respondent is not intending to proceed with prosecution further. Second respondent is represented by a Counsel. Learned Counsel submitted that dispute of second respondent with petitioner was resolved and second respondent has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. From the submission of the learned Counsel and Annexure A3 joint petition, it is absolutely clear that the dispute between the wife and the husband were subsequently amicably settled. The offence alleged against petitioner is a matrimonial offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. When the disputes between them are Crl.M.C.No.1826/2009 -3- settled, further continuation of the proceedings is not in their matrimonial interest, technicality shall not stand in the way of having a peaceful marital life. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice, petition is allowed and L.P.No.43/2008 arising from C.C.No.482/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Erattupetta is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE dkr