IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4470 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------- [CC.NO.391/2008 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KAYAMKULAM] .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. SAJU, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN, IDAKKATTU VEEDU, GOVINDAMUTTOM MURI, PUTHUPPALLY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. BHASKARAN, AGED 73 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, IDAKKATTU VEEDU, GOVINDAMUTTOM MURI, PUTHUPPALLY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. LAKSHMI, AGED 63 YEARS, W/O.BHASKARAN, IDAKKATTU VEEDU, GOVINDAMUTTOM MURI, PUTHUPPALLY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. BAIJU, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN, IDAKKATTU VEEDU, GOVINDAMUTTOM MURI, PUTHUPPALLY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SMT.S.L.SYLAJA, SMT. REENA P.R. RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SINDHU, AGED 31 YEARS, D/O.SARASAMMA, VISWABHAVANAM, THEKKEMANKUZHI MURI, BHARANIKKAVU VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD, R2 BY ADV. SMT.P.R.REENA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. -------------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C No.4470 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010. O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.No.391 of 2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kayamkulam, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 498(A), 323, and 341 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-A1 final report is submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Kayamkulam. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably by Annexure-A3 agreement and accepting that agreement Annexure-A2 judgment was passed by the Family Court, Alappuzha in O.P.No.448 of 2007 and O.P.No.439 of 2007. It is contended that in view of the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that she has settled entire matrimonial disputes and consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Crl.M.C No.4470 OF 2010 2 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that when the statement of the second respondent was taken to find out whether there was a settlement, though second respondent admitted that there was an agreement for settlement it was disclosed that entire amount as agreed was not paid. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that second respondent was not prepared to give a statement. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that Annexure-A3 agreement contains an endorsement by the first respondent that on 24.7.2009 she received Rs.1,75,000/-, on 21.5.2010 she received Rs. 2,25,000/-, on 4.11.2010 she received Rs.4,00,000/-. On 4.11.2010 she made an endorsement that entire amount due under the agreement was received. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that second respondent has received the entire amount due as agreed. As held by Apex Court in B.S Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another(2003 (4) SCC 675)when the matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C No.391 of 2008 of Judicial First Class Crl.M.C No.4470 OF 2010 3 Magistrate Court, Kayamkulam is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. mns