IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2008 / 30TH ASWINA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3950 of 2008() -------------------------------------- (C.C.NO.1380/06 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KUNNAMKULAM) PETITIONER:1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SURESAN @ SURESH, AGED 42, S/O.VALATHATTIL SANKARAN, CHITTILAPPILLY VILLAGE AND DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SOUMIA, AGED 22, D/O.CHOONDAPURAKKAL SIVABAGYAN, KANIPPAYYUR VILLAGE, AANAKKAL DESOM, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB- R1 ADV. SMT.ANITHA M.N. (EKM) FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 3950 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 498 A IPC. The 2nd respondent, his then wife, is the defacto complainant. Cognizance was taken against three accused persons including the petitioner on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. The co- accused have already been tried, found not guilty and acquitted. Petitioner was not available for trial. The case against the petitioner has been split up. 2. Petitioner, along with the 2nd respondent, has now come before this Court with this application to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction and quash the prosecution as enabled by the dictum in B.S.Joshi Vs. State of Haryana [AIR 2003 SC 1386]. The 2nd respondent has entered appearance through counsel. An affidavit duly attested has been filed by the 2nd respondent to confirm settlement and composition. The spouses have already secured divorce and both of them have remarried also, it is submitted. 3. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor. The learned Crl.M.C. No. 3950 OF 2008 -:2:- Prosecutor raises no objection against quashing of proceedings. 4. I am satisfied in the facts and circumstances of this case that this is an eminently fit case where extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in B.S.Joshi (supra) can be invoked to prematurely terminate the surviving prosecution against the petitioner herein. 5. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. b) CC No.1380/06 pending before the JFCM, Kunnamkulam which is re-numbered as CC No.1776/06 against the petitioner herein wherein the 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant is hereby quashed. c) Proceedings, if any pending against the petitioner and sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C shall of course be disposed of by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb Crl.M.C. No. 3950 OF 2008 -:3:- Crl.M.C. No. 3950 OF 2008 -:4:- Crl.M.C. No. 3950 OF 2008 -:5:-