IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 29TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 704 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CRIME NO.1942/2008 OF THE ANGAMALY POLICE STATION .......... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ----------------------- XAVIER, S/O.DEVASSYKUTTY @ SEBASTIAN, VALLIKKADAN HOUSE, KARUKKUTTY P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.WILSON URMESE MR.MARTIN PAUL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. BINDU, W/O.XAVIER, VALLIKADAN HOUSE, KARUKUTTY P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM R1 BY ADV. MR.SUNIL KUMAR A.G BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CM.APPL. NO.967/2009 IN CRMC. NO.704/2009 – Dismissed ORDER ON C.M.APPL. NO.968/2009 IN CRMC. NO.704/2009 – Closed 18.02.2009 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 704 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.1942/08 of Angamaly Police Station. A complaint is registered u/s 498A of the IPC and a joint statement is filed by the defacto complainant and the accused which indicates that they have settled the matter and the defacto complainant is not having any grievance against the husband. I had specifically ascertained the same from the counsel Sri.A.G. Anil Kumar appearing for the defacto complainant and he is sure about the correctness of the statement. So in the light of that submission I am prepared to accept the joint statement and proceed to dispose of the matter as follows. 2. What shall be the criteria in these types of cases had been decided by the Apex Court in Joshi's case(B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003 (4) SCC 675). The Apex Court held that while exercising jurisdiction u/s CRL.M.C. 704 OF 2009 -:2:- 482Cr.P.C. it is the duty of the High Court to find out what will be the impact if it is not accepted and further proceed with. The Apex Court also cautioned that the Courts have to be liberal in settlement of matrimonial disputes. It was further directed that in a case of this nature the Court shall not be hypertechnical for the reason that it will be counterproductive and it will defeat the very provisions of S.498A of IPC. Applying this principle to the facts of the present case and the fact that the husband and wife had settled the matter amicably it is desirable that the proceedings are not further carried out. Therefore the Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in Crime No.1942/08 of Angamaly Police Station are quashed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-