IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2009 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3879 of 2009() ------------------------- Crime No.294 of 2009 of Perambra Police Station PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.N. SUJATHA, D/O. LATE GOPALAN NAIR - VILASINI, MELE NADUVILOTTIL, EAST MALAYAMMA, R.E.C., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SMT.K.K.PREETHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, CRIME NO.294/2009, PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE. REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 2. BRESIN.K.P. @ UNNI, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. SHANMUGHAN @ SHANMUGHADAS, KANNANKOTTU THARAMMEL HOUSE, ERAVATTUR P.O., PERMABRA, KOZHIKODE 673 525 3. VALSALA, AGED 30 YEARS, W/O.SHANMUGHAN @ SHANMUGHADAS, KANNANKOTTU THARAMMEL HOUSE, ERAVATTUR P.O., PERMABRA, KOZHIKODE 673 525 ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ FOR R1 & 2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jma M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO. 3879 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 1st December 2009 ORDER Petitioner is the de facto complaint and respondents 2 and 3 are the accused in crime No.294/2009 of Perambra police station registered for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on the basis of first information statement of the petitioner. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that petitioner has settled all the disputes with second respondent husband and in view of settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Respondents 2 and 3 appeared through a counsel and also filed a compromise petition stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and petitioner is living with the second respondent and they are leading a happy married life and in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Crmc 3879/09 2 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. When the offence alleged against respondents 2 and 3 is matrimonial offence and the wife settled the disputes with her husband and is living with him, as held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675), it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. Crime No.294/2009 of Perambra police station is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.