IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2010 / 17TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1213 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.103/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, RANNI .................... (CRIME NO.146/2008 OF PERUNAD POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- SUDEESH KUMAR @ SUMESH, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. M.G. RAGHAVAN NAIR, PADMAYIL VEEDU, MADAMON THEKKEKKARA MURI, PERUNAD VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT /DE - FACTO COMPLAINANT /STATE: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SULEKHA, AGED 32, D/O. RETNAMMA, PADMAYIL VEEDU, MADAMON THEKKEKKARA MURI, PERUNAD VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITA DISTRICT. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR, PERUNAD POLICE STATION. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. I.B.PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1213 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused and first respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.No.103/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Ranni, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-1 final report. Petitioner is the husband and first respondent his wife. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes between them were settled amicably, evidenced by Annexure-2 agreement. 2. Annexure-2 agreement dated 26.7.2008 shows that entire matrimonial disputes, between the husband and wife, were settled amicably and both decided to live together and first respondent agreed to withdraw the prosecution. Affidavit filed by the first respondent, who is present in court along with the petitioner, shows that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioner and she is now residing with the CRMC 1213/10 2 petitioner cordially. Petitioner produced Annexure-4 photocopies of the Electoral Identity Cards of the petitioner and first respondent to establish their identity. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor was also heard. 4. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), when the matrimonial disputes are amicably settled between the husband and wife and they are living together cordially, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, standing on technicalities. First respondent and petitioner together appeared before the court and submitted that they are now living together as per the settlement arrived at under Annexure-2 agreement. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.103/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Ranni is quashed. 7th April, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv