IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4288 of 2010() ---------------------------------- CC.215/2010 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VADAKKANCHERY .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED 1 TO 3 -------------------------------------------------- 1. PRAVEEN.R., S/O.RAVINDRAN.R., VELLIYOTTIL HOUSE, P.O.PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR, KERALA-680 587. 2. RAVINDRAN.R., VELLIYOTTIL HOUSE, P.O.PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR, KERALA-680 587. 3. RADHADEVI, W/O.RAVINDRAN.R., VELLIYOTTIL HOUSE, P.O.PAZHAYANNUR, THRISSUR, KERALA-680 587. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JEBIN N.M., D/O.N.A.M.KABIR, NADUVILEPPARAMBIL, PONNARIMANGALAM, MULAVUKADU, ERNAKULAM-682 504. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. =========================== CRL.M.C.No. 4288 OF 2010 =========================== Dated this the 18th day of November,2010 ORDER Petitioners are the accused and first respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.215/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkancherry taken cognizance for the offence under section 498A read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure III final report submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Pazhayannur. Petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure contending that first petitioner and first respondent are husband and wife and they have settled all the matrimonial disputes and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. First respondent appeared through a Crl.M.C.4288/2010 2 counsel and filed an affidavit stating that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with her husband and in laws and consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. As held by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675) when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution standing on technicalities. The affidavit filed by first respondent wife establishes that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably. In such circumstances it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.215/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakancherry is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Crl.M.C.4288/2010 3 tpl/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. --------------------- W.P.(C).NO. /06 --------------------- JUDGMENT SEPTEMBER,2006