IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 18TH MAGHA 1932 CRL.MC.NO. 314 OF 2011() -------------------------------------- CC.798/2008 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. RAJESH, AGED 30, S/O.RAJAN, ADUVARI NILATH, THIKKODI, PALOOR, P.O.THIKKODI, CALICUT DISTRICT. 2. RAJAN, AGED 77, S/O.UNNITHAN, ADUVARI NILATH, THIKKODI, PALOOR, P.O.THIKKODI, CALICUT DISTRICT. 3. SUKUMARI, AGED 50, W/O.RAJAN, ADUVARI NILATH, THIKKODI, PALOOR, P.O.THIKKODI, CALICUT DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SHALINI, AGED 27, D/O.KAYIRICHI KUNJI, KASABA BEACH, KASARAGOD P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA ADV. SMT.AMBILY (PREMKUMAR) FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.314 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 07th day of February, 2011 O R D E R Petitioners are accused in Crime No.484 of 2008 of the Kasargod Police Station and C.C. No.798 of 2008 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Kasargod for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. First and second respondent are husband and wife. Case is that petitioners subjected respondent No.2 to cruelty demanding more ornaments and money and misappropriated her ornaments. Petitioners seek to quash proceeding against them on the strength of Annexure A3, agreement entered into between the first petitioner and respondent No.2. As per the said agreement they are residing separately. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. It is seen from Annexure-A3 agreement that first petitioner and respondent No.2 have settled the dispute. Respondent No.2 has also sown an affidavit stating that she has settled the dispute with the petitioner, she has no grievance in the matter and she does not want to prosecute the case further. CRL.M.C. No.314 of 2011 -: 2 :- Counsel for respondent No.2 has confirmed the fact of settlement. In the light of the settlement reached there is no possibility of the prosecution having a successful culmination. Hence I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure-A1, FIR in Crime No.484 of 2008 of Kasargod Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and further proceedings against petitioners in C.C. No.798 of 2008 of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasargod are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv