IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2010 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4463 of 2010( ) ------------------------- SC.101/2004 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-III), KASARAGODE CRIME NO.437/1999 of Kasaragode Police Station .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ----------------------------- 1. RAMAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.KARIYA, RESIDING AT KOLLYA HOUSE, P.O.PATLA MADHUR VILLAGE, KASARGOD TALUK & DISTRICT. 2. ANANDA, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.KARIYA, RESIDING AT KOLLYA HOUSE, P.O.PATLA MADHUR VILLAGE, KASARGOD TALUK & DISTRICT. * 3. CHOMA, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.KARIYA RESIDING AT KOLLYA HOUSE, P.O.PATLA MADHUR VILLAGE, KASARGOD TALUK & DISTRICT. P3 is deleted from the party as per order dtd.17/12/2010 of Crl.M.A.8013/10 BY ADV. SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.USHA, D/O.CHUKRA, RESIDING AT KOLLYA HOUSE, P.O.PATLA, PIN-671 323, MADHUR VILLAGE, KASARGOD TALUK & DISTRICT. R1 by PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM R2 BY ADV.P.S.NISHIL THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4463 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 17th December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are accused 1 and 2 in S.C.101/2004 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-III), Kasargod, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 376, 116,312, 448 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case is that four months earlier to 22/7/1999, first petitioner went to house No.MP.IV/649 of Kollam Harijan Colony where second respondent was residing and committed rape on her. On 22/7/1999 first petitioner along with his brothers, the second petitioner and deceased third accused, criminally trespassed into her house and abetted second respondent to undergo abortion in a hospital and when she declined, Crmc 4463/10 2 she was threatened that she will be killed and the accused thereby committed the offences. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contending that entire disputes with the second respondent were settled amicably and first petitioner married the second respondent and three children were born in that wedlock and in such circumstances, 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 subsequent to the registration of the case, disputes with the accused were settled amicably, due to intervention of mediators, and first petitioner married her and they are residing together and three children were born in that wedlock and she has no grievance Crmc 4463/10 3 against the petitioners and six witnesses have already been examined and the case was adjourned indefinitely for the examination of her father and in view of the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that first petitioner married second respondent and they are living together as husband and wife and subsequent to the incident two children were born, who are now aged 7 and 5 years. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 5. Prosecution case is that first petitioner committed rape on the second respondent, four months earlier to 22/7/1999 and when she was pregnant, on 22/7/1999 first Crmc 4463/10 4 petitioner along with his brothers, the second petitioner and third accused trespassed into the house and induced her to undergo abortion and when she refused they threatened her. The very fact that second respondent did not raise any objection for four months, in spite of the fact that she became pregnant indicates that sexual intercourse was with her consent. Subsequent conduct strengthen that fact. More over, first petitioner later married second respondent and two children were born thereafter. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution, on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. If so, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Though this cannot be treated as a precedent, on the peculiar facts and Crmc 4463/10 5 circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice the prosecution is to be quashed. Petition is allowed. S.C.101/2004 on the file of Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-III), Kasargod is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.