IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2010 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 888 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CC.362/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, THAMARASSERY CRIME NO.228/2009 OF MUKKAM POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ASHIFA A.K., D/O. MUHAMMED AYANIKKARA, AGED 25 YEARS, MANGALASSERI, CHENNAMANGALLUR, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. SUNIYAS K.P., S/O. MAMMED KOYA, AGED 27 YEARS, KALAPPUNA NILAM, POOVATTUPARAMBA, PERUMANNA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.K.M.FIROZ, SMT.M.SHAJNA. RESPONDENT/STATE -------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUKKAM POLICE STATION, CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 888 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 15th day of March,2010 ORDER First petitioner is the de facto complainant and second petitioner her husband the accused in C.C.362/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II, Thamarassery taken cognizance for the offences under sections 498A and 406 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A final report. This petition is filed to quash the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and in view of the settlement it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Crl.M.C.888/2010 2 3. When matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution standing on technicalities as held by the Apex Court in BS.Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003(4) SCC 675.) First petitioner is the wife and second petitioner her husband. The petition itself shows that they have amicably settled the entire disputes and consequent to the settlement, first petitioner has no subsisting grievance against the second petitioner. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C. 362/2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-II, Thamarassery is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006