IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2010 / 25TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 148 of 2010() ------------------------ CC.561/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER(S): A1 TO A3: --------------------------------------- 1. SAFEER KHAN, AGE 32,(A1) S/O.ABOOBACKER KUNJU, VADAKKAEKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, MANIKKAL MURIYIL, PULLEMPARA VILLAGE. 2. ABOOBACJER KUNJU, AGE 66 (A2) S/O.ABDUL ALI, VADAKKAEKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, MANIKKAL MURIYIL, PULLEMPARA VILLAGE. 3. LATHEEFA BEEVI, AGED 59 (A3) D/O.AAMINA UMMAL, S/O.ABDUL ALI, VADAKKAEKONATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, MANIKKAL MURIYIL, PULLEMPARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. NASEEJA, AGE 23(CW1) D/O.NASEERA BEEVI, VARIKUZHI VEEDU, ANDOORKONAM JUNCTION, ANDOORKONAM VILLAGE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR R2 BY ADV. MR.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.148 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 15th January 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.561/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Nedumangad taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken and all further proceedings, contending that when the matrimonial disputes are settled amicably between husband and wife, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared Crmc 148/10 2 through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and in view of the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Case was registered on the complaint filed by the second respondent alleging that petitioners committed offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The police investigated the case, after the complaint was sent for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure by the Magistrate. Based on Annexure-A final report cognizance was taken, under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Crmc 148/10 3 Annexure-B agreement entered into between the parties and the affidavit filed by the second respondent establish that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) when the offence alleged against the petitioners are matrimonial offences and there has been complete settlement of the matrimonial disputes, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.561/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Nedumangad is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. Crmc 148/10 4 uj.