IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4657 of 2010() ----------------------------------- ( CRIME NO.727/2008 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION) -------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. AJAYKUMAR NAIR, S/O.SUDHAKARAN NAIR, AGED 33, VAISHNAVOM, ERUMELI KARA, KUMARAPURAM.P.O., KIZHAKAMBALAM, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. VIJAYAN, S/O.SUDHAKARAN NAIR, AGED 30, VAISHNAVOM, ERUMELI KARA, KUMARAPURAM.P.O., KIZHAKAMBALAM, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SMT.SANTHAMMA ISSAC SRI.N.C.THOMAS SMT.ANU THANKAM MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. ASHA.R., D/O.RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT ASHANIVAS, NEAR SASTHA TEMPLE, PERUMBAVOOR.P.O., KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 683 542. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM R2 BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE VARGHESE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4657 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.No.1052/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Perumbavoor, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-AI final report. First petitioner is the husband and second respondent, the wife. Second petitioner is the brother of the first petitioner. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution as it would only cause difficulty to the cordial relationship between the CRMC 4657/10 2 parties and therefore, the proceedings is to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second 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 second respondent wife establishes that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.1052/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Perumbavoor is quashed. 26th November, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv