IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 707 of 2011() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO.1623/20009 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ......... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 & 2 ---------------------------------------------- 1. RAMESH BABU, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, 'REMYA NIVAS', NALAM MILE, SOUTH VAZHAKULAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. SARADAMBAL @ SARADA, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O. RAMACHANDRAN, 'REMYA NIVAS', NALAM MILE, SOUTH VAZHAKULAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.E.C.POULOSE SMT.BOBBY RAPHEAL.C RESPONDENT(S): STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTING S.I. OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SAUMYA @ SAUMI, AGED 24 YEARS, D/O. SALEEM, KELAZET PARAMBU HOUSE, MATTANCHERRY P.O., COCHIN-682 002. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.J.MOHAMED ANZAR R2 BY ADV. SMT.JALAJA SREENIVASAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.707 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.1623 of 2009 of Aluva Police Station for offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Annexure-A1 is the FIR in the said case. It is alleged that petitioners subjected respondent No.2, wife of petitioner No.1 to cruelty demanding more ornaments. Petitioners seek to quash proceeding against them on the strength of a compromise reached with respondent No.2. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that all matrimonial disputes between the parties including proceeding pending before Family Court, Ernakulam have been settled and hence it is not necessary to continue this proceeding against petitioners. It is also submitted that respondent No.2 has sworn Annexure-A6, affidavit where it is stated that the dispute is settled between parties . I have heard learned counsel for respondent No.2 who confirmed the settlement and authenticity of Annexure-A6, affidavit as that of respondent No.2. I heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. It is seen from Annexure-A4, joint petition that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have filed a joint petition in the Family Court, Ernakulam under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce. Annexure-A5 is the agreement executed between respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 a uthenticity Crl.MC No.707/2011 2 of which is confirmed by learned counsel for respondent No.2. It is stated that the entire dispute is settled and that she she has no objection in quashing the FIR in Crime No.1623 of 2009. Since the parties have settled the dispute outside court I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1, FIR in Crime No.1623 of 2009 of Aluva Police Station and all proceeding taken pursuant thereto against petitioners are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks