IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2010 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4739 of 2010() ----------------------- LPR NO.21/2010 IN CC 5037/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, IRINJALAKUDA ................ PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------- 1. RASHEED, S/O.ABDULKHADER, AGED 26 YEARS, KURIYAPPILLY HOUSE, KARUPPADANNA, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE. 2. NAFEESA, W/O.ABDULKHADER, AGED 47 YEARS, KURIYAPPILLY HOUSE, KARUPPADANNA, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------- 1. JASMINE, D/O.HAMSA, AGED 24 YEARS, ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KARUPPADANNA, THEKKUMKARA VILLAGE - 680 687. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.R.ANANDAN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4739 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 3rd December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and first respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.5037/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakuda now pending as L.P.21/2010. First petitioner and first respondent are husband and wife. Second petitioner is the mother of the first petitioner. Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-1 complaint against four accused. Accused 3 and 4 were already discharged by Annexure-2 order. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure Crmc 4739/10 2 to quash the proceedings against them contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and hence, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Petitioners along with first respondent filed a petition seeking permission to compound the offence contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled and therefore, it is to be compounded. First respondent has also filed separate affidavit stating that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes amicably and consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Crmc 4739/10 3 4. As held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and proceed with the prosecution. Affidavit filed by the first respondent establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes amicably. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. L.P.21/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Irinjalakuda is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.