IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 CRL.MC.NO. 137 OF 2011() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO.156 OF 2009 OF KAZHAKKOOTTAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): A1-A4 -------------------------------- 1. NISHAD, AGE 33, S/O.FAKEET MOIDEEN, NEW MANZIL, NEAR ARMY SCHOOL, AMBALLUR DESOM, VADAKUMBHAGAM MURI, KAZHAKUTTOM VILLAGE. 2. FAKEER MOIDEEN, AGE 76, S/O.MOHAMMED ALI, NEW MANZIL, NEAR ARMY SCHOOL, AMBALLUR DESOM, VADAKUMBHAGAM MURI, KAZHAKUTTOM VILLAGE. 3. SUBAIDA BEEVI, AGE 63, D/O.KHADEEJA BEEVI, NEW MANZIL, NEAR ARMY SCHOOL, AMBALLUR DESOM, VADAKUMBHAGAM MURI, KAZHAKUTTOM VILLAGE. 4. SOPHIA, AGE 43, D/O.SUBAIDA BEEVI, NEW MANZIL, NEAR ARMY SCHOOL, AMBALLUR DESOM, VADAKUMBHAGAM MURI, KAZHAKUTTOM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKUTTOM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. LAJEENA @ KUNJUMOL, AGE 26 (CW1), D/O.JAMEELA BEEVI, J.J.HOUSE, PARAYATHUKONAM, KEEZHUVALLOM VILLAGE, PIN-695013. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR ADV. SRI.V.S. THOSHIN FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.137 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 24th day of January, 2011 O R D E R Accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.156 of 2009 of Kazhakoottam police station for offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and the Dowry Prohibition Act are the petitioners before me seeking to quash Annexure-I, FIR and further proceedings thereto. First petitioner married the de facto complainant on 02.07.2006. She alleged that petitioners and accused Nos.5 to 8 subjected her to cruelty, physically and mentally demanding more dowry and committed the offence as above stated. Investigating Officer submitted final report against petitioners and accused Nos.5 to 8 alleging commission of offence as first above stated. De facto complainant preferred a petition seeking further investigation under Sec.173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That was allowed and in the further investigation accused Nos.5 to 8 were found to be not involved in the offence and accordingly a report was filed. Investigation against petitioners continued. In the meantime parties have settled the dispute and have come to terms. Respondent No.2 has filed Annexure-D, affidavit in that line. It is therefore prayed that CRL.M.C. No. 137 of 2011 -: 2 :- proceedings against petitioners may be quashed. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Leaned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has confirmed the fact of settlement between the parties. 2. It is seen from Annexure-D filed by respondent No.2 that the matter has been settled between her and petitioners. As per the settlement first petitioner and respondent No.2 are to live separately. Offence is personal to and between petitioners and respondent No.2. The cordial relationship parties now have in view of the compromise as revealed from Annexure-D has to be maintained and in the light of the stand of respondent No.2 as seen from Annexure-D there is also no possibility of the prosecution having a successful culmination. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure-A, FIR and all proceedings pursuant to crime No.156 of 2009 of the Kazhakkoottam police station concerning petitioners are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv