IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2010 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4423 of 2010() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.1079/2010 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. ASHIQUE, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.SAINUDHEEN, KUNNATHUPADIKKAL HOUSE, POZHANKAVU, PANANGAD P.O., SREE NARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 2. SAINUDHEEN, S/O.AHAMED KUTTY, AGED 65 YEARS, KUNNATHUPADIKKAL HOUSE, POZHANKAVU, PANANGAD P.O., SREE NARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 3. JUBAIRIYA, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.SAINUDHEEN, KUNNATHUPADIKKAL HOUSE, POZHANKAVU, PANANGAD P.O., SREE NARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. 4. SAMEENA ISMAIL, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.SAINUDHEEN, KUNNATHUPADIKKAL HOUSE, POZHANKAVU, PANANGAD P.O., SREE NARAYANAPURAM VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH, SMT.VAHEEDA BABU, SRI.P.G. PRAMOD, SRI.RAHUL KANDAMPULLY. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. BINI, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.IBRAHIM, KARUKAPPADATH VEDIYIL HOUSE, PULLUT P.O. PULLUT VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKAM (FIR NO.1079/2010) POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4423 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are the accused and first respondent, the defacto complainant in Crime No.1079/2010 of Mathilakam Police Station, registered under Annexure-2 FIR, based on Annexure-1 complaint filed by the first respondent before Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kodungallur and sent for investigation under Section 156 (3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. First petitioner is the husband and first respondent, the wife. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably under Annexure-3 agreement and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably under Annexure-3 agreement and consequent to the settlement, she is not CRMC 4423/10 2 interested in further prosecution and does not intend to prosecute the case further and therefore, 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 v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), when the matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. The affidavit filed by the first respondent wife establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioners and consequently, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. Crime No.1079/2010 of Mathilakam Police Station, registered under Annexure-2 FIR is quashed. 9th December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv