IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 25TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 425 of 2011() ------------------------ SC.570/2010 of PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO.2026/2007 OF CENTRAL POLICESTATION, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): DEFACTO COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- 1. JOSEPH S/O VACKO, AGED 55 YEARS, VALIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU, PULLEPPADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. DIANA JOSEPH, D/O.JOSEPH, AGED 25 YEARS, VALIYAPARAMBIL VEEDU, PULLEPPADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.MUJEEB RESPONDENT(S): STATE/ACCUSED 1 & 2 ---------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. JOJO JOSEPH, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O JOSEPH DEVASSIA, KUNNETHET VEEDU, KAPPLUVENGAKARA, PERUVANTHENAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM, PIN 685532. 3. MURUKAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.RAMAYYA, RBT ESTATE LAYAM, PAZHAYAPAMBANAR ESTATE, PEERUMEDU KARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN 685566. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.425 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of February, 2011. ORDER Petitioner No.1 is the defacto complainant and petitioner No.2, his daughter who is the victim of alleged act of respondent Nos.2 and 3 who now face trial for offences punishable under Sections 366, 493, 494 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioners say that they have settled the case with respondent Nos.2 and 3 and request this Court to quash proceedings against respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. Ernakulam Central Police registered Crime No.2026 of 2007 on the information given by petitioner No.1 and after investigation submitted final report alleging that respondent No.2, suppressing that he is already married compelled or persuaded petitioner No.2 to marry him, on the belief given to her that she is the legally wedded wife had sex with her and respondent No.2 tried to snatch away the gold ornaments belonging to her. Respondent No.3 is said to have shared the common intention with respondent No.2 for the said acts. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel that marriage of petitioner No.2 is fixed and pendency of the case is causing much agony to her. Learned counsel however has sought permission to withdraw this petition. I have heard learned Crl.MC No.425/2011 2 Public Prosecutor also. 4. Having regard to the request made I am inclined to allow that. Resultantly this petition is dismissed as withdrawn. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks