IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2010 / 26TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4228 of 2010 () ------------------------- ( CC.424/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, THALASSERY) .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------------- KUNNUMMAL SREEJITH KUMAR, S/O.LATE SHEKHARAN, `SREEJA NIVAS', DHARMADAM, PALAYAD DESOM, CHIRAKKUNNI, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.BINOY RAM RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SHAREENA.M.C, D/O.K.P.RAGHAVAN, VADAVATHI CHALIL HOUSE, PINARAYI P.O., THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN 670741. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SMT.JAYA R2 BY ADV. SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4228 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 18th October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the husband and second respondent is his wife. Petitioner is the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.424/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Thalassery, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 498 A and 420 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-2 final report. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that by Annexure-3 agreement entire disputes were settled amicably and second respondent agreed for quashing the proceedings before the learned Magistrate. Crmc 4228/10 2 2. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed a statement to the effect that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Annexure-3 agreement entered into between the husband and wife, with the statement 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 matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution on the ground that offence under Section 498 A is a non compoundable offence. An offence under Section Crmc 4228/10 3 420 of Indian Penal Code is compoundable. The statement filed by the second respondent establishes that she has compounded the offence under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code. In view of the settlement of the matrimonial dispute, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution for the offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code. Petition is allowed. C.C.424/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Thalassery is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.