IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4965 of 2010() ------------------------ CRIME NO. 415/2010 OF NEDUMKANDOM POLICE STATION .................................... PETITIONER / ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ VEERANNAN, LAKSHAM VEEDU COLONY, MEETAKIL BHAGOM, PARATHODU VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS / STATE & COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMKANDOM POLICE STATION – 683 553. 3. MURUKESHWARI, W/O.VEERANNAN, LAKSHAM VEEDU COLONY, MEETAKIL BHAGAM, PARATHODU VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT – 685 512. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM R3 BY ADV. SMT.BINITHA JAMES THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4965 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 20th day of December,2010 ORDER Petitioner is the accused and third respondent the defacto complainant, who is also the injured in Crime 415/2010 of Nedumkandom Police Station, registered for the offence under section 326 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A1 F.I.R. Petition is filed to quash all further proceedings contending that entire disputes with the third respondent were settled and consequent to the settlement it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Third respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that petitioner is her husband and they were residing together prior to the incident and Crl.M.C.4965/2010 2 subsequently entire disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, she has no grievance against the petitioner and therefore she has no objection for quashing the prosecution. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner third respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. The affidavit filed by the third respondent wife establishes that she has settled all the disputes with petitioner her husband. Annexure A1 F.I.R establishes that offence alleged against the petitioner is purely personal in nature against the third respondent. As held by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008(3) KLT 19) when the offences alleged against the petitioner is purely personal in nature and there is an amicable settlement between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the Crl.M.C.4965/2010 3 prosecution. Petition is allowed. Crime 415/2010 of Nedumkandom Police Station registered under Annexure A1 F.I.R is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006