IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 3046 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.762/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, HOSDRUG .................... PETITIONER: ------------ P.A.BASHEER @ BASHEER PALLIPUZHA ABBAS, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.ABBAS, PALLIPUZHA HOUSE, PALLIKARA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. (NOW EMPLOYED AT ABU DHABI, P.O.BOX NO. 295, U.A.E) BY ADV. SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. SMT.NOWSHIBA.C.H., W/O.P.A.BASHEER, PALLIPUZHA, PALLIKARA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. SMT.M.A.BEEFATHIMMA,W/O.LATE C.H.IBRAHIM HOSDURG KADAPURAM, HOSDURG VILLAGE, KASARAGODE DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HOSDURG POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.G.ADITYA SHENOY FOR R1 & R2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.3046 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008 ORDER The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Sec.498A IPC. Cognizance was taken in that case on the basis of a final report submitted by the police after due investigation. That crime, in turn, was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the 2nd respondent on behalf of the 1st respondent and referred by the learned Magistrate to the police under Sec.156 (3) Cr.P.C. The 1st respondent is the wife and the 2nd respondent is the mother-in-law of the petitioner. The prosecution is pending as C.C.No.762/08 before the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Hosdurg. 2. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have settled their disputes. One of the co-accused i.e., the sister of the petitioner, was found not guilty and acquitted by Crl.M.C. No.3046 of 2008 -: 2 :- Annexure-D judgment earlier. The petitioner was not available for trial at that stage. The parties have come to this Court now to apprise this Court of the fact that the spouses have settled their disputes and they have resumed harmonious cohabitation during the pendency of the prosecution. Continuance of the prosecution is, in these circumstances, unnecessary and is a needless irritant in the harmonious relationship between the spouses. They having settled their disputes, the powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked and the surviving prosecution against the petitioner may be quashed, it is prayed. 3. Respondents 1 and 2 have entered appearance through counsel. The 1st respondent has filed an affidavit duly attested by her counsel to confirm that the disputes have been settled and the spouses have resumed harmonious cohabitation. 4. I am satisfied from the totality of circumstances available and the submissions made at the Bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the parties have settled their disputes and the 1st respondent has compounded the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner. If legally permissible and possible, I am satisfied that the composition can be accepted and the proceedings can be brought to premature termination. 5. The offence under Sec.498A of the IPC is not Crl.M.C. No.3046 of 2008 -: 3 :- compoundable. But the learned counsel for the parties, in these circumstances, rightly rely on the decisions of the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshy v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386) and Madhan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 AIR SCW 2287). I am satisfied that, relying on these decisions, powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked in the facts and circumstances of the instant case where such invocation is found to be eminently justified. The interests of justice may at times transcend the interests of mere law. The powers reserved under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked by this Court to do justice beyond the law in an appropriate case. Powers under Sec.482 Cr.P.C,. are described to be awesome. 6. Considering all the relevant circumstances, including the precedents referred above, I am persuaded to agree that this is an eminently fit case where the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. as enabled by the dictum in the two cases referred above can safely be invoked and premature termination of the proceedings can be brought about. 7. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. (b) C.C.No.762/08 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg, against the petitioner herein under Crl.M.C. No.3046 of 2008 -: 4 :- Sec.498A IPC is hereby quashed. Needless to say, the proceedings under Sec.446 Cr.P.C., if any, pending must be disposed of in accordance with law. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge