IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 24TH APRIL 2009 / 4TH VAISAKHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1395 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.132/2007 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3: --------------- 1. SUDHEER.A.T. @ MUHAMMED SUBAIR, AGED 34, S/O. ABOOBACKER, A.T.HOUSE, NEAR PANAMA BUILDING, KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE. 2. ABOOBACKER, AGED 59 YEARS, A.T. HOUSE, NEAR PANAMA BUILDING, KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE. 3. FATHIMA, W/O. ABOOBACKER, A.T. HOUSE, NEAR PANAMA BUILDING, KAKKODI, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: --------------- 1. SAIRA BHANU P.T, AGED 27 YEARS, W/O. SUDHEER A.T. @ MUHAMMED SUBAIR, VALAYATHODI PARAMBU, PAYYANAKKAL, KOZHIKODE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN FOR R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.V.T.K.MOHANAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.1395 OF 2009 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of April, 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused, A1 to A3 in Crime No.21/2003 of Panniyankara Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498 A, 495 and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the charge laid before the court, after completion of the investigation of the crime, submitting that a composition of the offence had been arrived by them with the defacto complainant. A compromise petition purported to have been signed by the petitioners with the defacto complainant is also produced along with the petition. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Public Prosecutor. In cases, where the offences involved do not affect the interest of the public at CRL.M.C.1395/09 2 large, even if the same is not compoundable, this Court has power to quash the proceedings even in respect of such non- compoundable offence to advance the ends of justice, is the submission of the counsel for the reliefs claimed in the petition on the composition arrived by the petitioners with the defacto complainant. I am not impressed by the submission. What is sought to be quashed in the petition is a police charge sheet filed against the petitioners, after completion of the investigation of the crime, before the court. Annexure-2 is stated to be the copy of the charge, wherein, on perusal, it is seen it is only a part of the charge sheet without even disclosing the names and particulars of the accused indicted thereunder. After laying of the charge, as seen from the averments made in the petition, the case now stands posted for framing of charge, and, at this stage, the petitioners have rushed to this Court with the petition to quash the proceedings against them on the ground that a composition of the offence had been arrived at with the defacto complainant. The genuineness of the composition made by the petitioners can be ascertained only after an enquiry. The offences imputed against the petitioners include non-compoundable CRL.M.C.1395/09 3 offence. But the case emanates from matrimonial dispute and no public interest is involved for the offences imputed, and as such, this Court can give approval to the composition, is the case of the petitioners to seek quashing of the proceedings against them. I am not persuaded to accept that submission since larger interest of the public are involved in offences relating to matrimonial disputes, as the family is the nucleus of the Society. The destruction of the family, that too, with violence and intimidation, will have its ramifications in the Society, and will affect the interest of the public as a whole. The charge laid against the petitioners before the court, after trial, has to reach its logical conclusion in accordance with law, and the present petition filed to quash the proceedings cannot be entertained. This Criminal M.C. is dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp CRL.M.C.1395/09 4 S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. -------------------------------------------------------- CRL.R.P.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- O R D E R --------------------------------------------------------- 23rd March, 2009