IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2010 / 23TH POUSHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3358 of 2009() ------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.518/2009 OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 & 2 /CRIME NO.518/09: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JABEELA MARY JOSEPH, AGED 36 YEARS, D/O.K.C.BABU, KANDATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, DARSANA NAGAR, PATTATHANAM P.O., KOLLAM. 2. SHEELA JACOB, AGED 42 YEARS, ROSHDALE, THEKKETHARAYIL, NO.44, MYTHRI NAGAR, KOLLAM TOWN P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADVS. MR.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, MR.C.S.DIAS, MR.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN. 1ST RESPONDENT(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CR NO.518/2009: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2ND RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NO.518/2009: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.M.ALEXANDER, S/O.M.K.VARGHESE, AGED 41 YEARS, KOYIKKAPARAMBIL VEEDU, KOZHENCHERY MURI AND VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. MR.P.DEEPAK R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.3358 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 13th January 2010 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and first respondent the de facto complainant in crime No.518/2009 of Pathanamthitta police station registered for the offences under Sections 120 B, 379 and 411 of Indian Penal Code on a complaint filed by the first respondent before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pathanamthitta and sent for investigation under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contending that first respondent is the husband of the first petitioner and second petitioner is the cousin sister of first petitioner and complaint happened to Crmc 3358/09 2 be filed at a time when there were matrimonial disputes between the parties and subsequently, entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and the disputes involved in this case has also been settled and therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Annexure-B copy of compromise petition filed by the parties in W.P.C.20726/2009 shows that there has been settlement of all the disputes. Compromise petition shows that there was also an agreement between the parties not to prosecute the case. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that first respondent filed O.P.318/2009 and 382/2009 before Family court, Thiruvalla and also filed M.C.48/2009 before Judicial First Crmc 3358/09 3 Class Magistrate-II, Kollam and as against interim orders passed by the Family court, petitioners filed W.P.C.20726/2009 and 27143/2009 and respondents 2 and 3 in O.P.318/2009 filed W.P.C.19728/2009 and there was a mediation talk before this court and thereafter I.A.12146/2009 was filed in W.P.C.20726/2009 settling all the disputes between the parties and one of the specific condition in the compromise petition was that parties will file Crl.M.C to quash all further proceedings in crime No.518/2009 of Pathanamthitta police station and as per the compromise petition, crime No.51/2009 is to be quashed as settled and first respondent has absolutely no objection for quashing the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Crmc 3358/09 4 petitioners, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Annexure-B compromise petition filed before this court in W.P.C.20726/2009 between the parties and the affidavit filed by first respondent in this case establish that entire disputes between the parties were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement parties were agreed to get the criminal case quashed. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) when the offence alleged against the petitioners are purely personal in nature and there has been complete settlement of all the disputes between the parties, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution, Crmc 3358/09 5 especially when consequent to the settlement there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution. Petition is allowed. Crime No.518/2009 of Pathanamthitta police station is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.