IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2011 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1515 of 2011() ------------------------- CC.82/2011 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, HOSDRUG .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ T.K.ABDUL SALAM, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.O.T.SHAMSUDHEEN, R/AT ANNUR, PAYYANNUR, P.O.ANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH RESPONDENT(S): STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT (CW1): ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE-REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. T.M.SAUDATH, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.KUNHABDULLA, R/AT MADAKANDI VEETTIL, VALIYAPARAMBA, P.O.VALIYAPARAMBA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 001. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1515 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is accused in Crime No.809 of 2010 of Chandera Police Station and C.C.No.82 of 2011 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg for offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered on a complaint preferred by the second respondent, wife of petitioner. Petitioner requests this Court to quash proceeding against him on the strength of a settlement reached with the second respondent. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Annexure-III is an agreement executed by the second respondent in favour of petitioner. Annexure-IV is the affidavit of second respondent attested by a Notrary Public. Apart from that there is a joint petition (Crl.M.A.No.3085 of 2011) signed by petitioner, second respondent and their respective counsel. The fact of settlement is confirmed by learned counsel for petitioner and the second respondent. Genuineness and authenticity of the agreement, affidavit and joint petition is also confirmed by learned counsel on both sides. It is seen that the dispute is settled between petitioner and second respondent. Crl.MC No.1515/2011 2 3. Since the dispute is purely personal to and between petitioner and second respondent and that the dispute is settled, I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Final report in Crime No.809 of 2010 of Chandera Police Station, cognizance taken thereon and proceeding against petitioner in C.C.No.82 of 2011 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Hosdurg are quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks