IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2009 / 12TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2298 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CC.487/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- 1. RAJESH P.KAIMAL,RAJBHAVAN, NECHIPUZHOOR P.O.,PALAI,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. T.V. PRABHAKARA KAIMAL,RETD.DIST. TREASURY OFFICER,RAJBHAVAN, NECHIPUZHOOR P.O.,PALAI. 3. V.P. SUMATHI,RETD.TELECOM TECHNICAL SUPERVISOR, RAJBHAVAN, NECHIPUZHOOR P.O.,PALAI. BY ADV. MR.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL MR.P.JAYAKRISHNA KAIMAL RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE DIRECTOR PUBLIC PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. ANU R.KAIMAL, FLAT NO.44/2207 A, INDIRA APARTMENTS, ASHOKA ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI-17. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.B. VINOD. R2 BY ADV. MR.REJI GEORGE, SMT.MANJU RAJAN . THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO. 2298 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 3rd August 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are accused in C.C.487/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ernakulam. Second respondent is the defacto complainant and wife of the first petitioner. Petitioners 2 and 3 are the parents of the first petitioner. Prosecution case is that the accused committed offences under Sections 323, 498 A and 506 (ii) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case contending that there was an amicable settlement of all the disputes between petitioners and second respondent and in such circumstances there is no necessity to proceed with the case. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and along with the petitioners filed a joint statement to the effect that in view of the amicable settlement of all the disputes between petitioners and second respondent the proceedings before the court is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for CRMC 2298/09 2 petitioners and second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Offences alleged against petitioners are matrimonial offences and connected offences. Joint statement filed by second respondent with petitioners establish that matrimonial disputes were amicably settled. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (AIR 2003 SC 1386) when the matrimonial disputes were amicably settled, though offences are not compoundable under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and not to permit the parties to settle the disputes. When there is a settlement of the disputes between petitioners and second respondent, likelihood of a successful prosecution is too bleak. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice, the case is to be quashed. Petition is allowed. C.C.487/2009 on the file of Judicial first Class Magistrate, Ernakulam is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.