IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2010 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4646 of 2010() ------------------------------------ ( CC.230/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KUTHUPARAMBA) .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. KATTIL RAFEEQUE, S/O.ASSU, MARIYAR KOTTARATHIL, CHOKLI, THALASSERY. 2. KATTIL ISMAIL, S/O.ASSU, PUTHIYAVEETTIL SAFA, CHOKLI, THALASSERY. 3. KATTIL SHERIFA, S/O.ASSU, KUNIYIL HOUSE, CHOKLI, THALASSERY. 4. P.V.SUHRA, W/O.ISMAIL, PUTHIYAVEETTIL SAFA, CHOKLI, THALASSERY. BY ADVS. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------- 1. M.AYISHA, D/O.KHADERKUTTY, MARAKKUNNATH VEEDU, KANDAMKUNNU, NEERVELI, KUTHUPARAMBA, THALASSERY. 670 643. 2. STATE OF KERALA, (SHO, KUTHUPARAMBA POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.MOHAMMED KUNHI R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.4646 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.230/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kuthuparamba, taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 406 and 498A of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-A final report. First respondent is the defacto complainant and wife of the first petitioner. Petitioners 2 to 4 are the brothers and sister-in-law 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. First respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and CRMC 4646/10 2 consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings, as she is not willing to proceed with the case further. 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 petitioner. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.230/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kuthuparamba is quashed. 3rd December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv