IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 2833 of 2008() ------------------------- CC.1033/2001 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ALUVA (CRIME NO.146/2001 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- PAVITHRAN, AGED 57 S/O. PAULOSE, EDACHERY HOUSE, PUTHIYANGADU,KANNUR BY ADV. SRI.SUBAL J.PAUL RESPONDENTS / COMPLAINANT & STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. KOCHUTRESIA, AGED 47 W/O. PAVITHRAN, VALIYAPARAMBIL, FISHERMAN COLONY ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY P.P. HIGH COURT OF KERALA BY ADV. SMT.V.BEENA FOR R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.2833 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008 ORDER Petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 498 A I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report filed by the police after due investigation. Crime was registered as early as in 2001. Calendar Case was also registered in 2001. The prosecution is pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Aluva. The petitioner/accused and the 1st respondent/complainant have now come before this Court to apprise this Court of the fact that the disputes between them have been settled and that the 1st respondent has compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner. They have actually resumed harmonious cohabitation from 2006. In these circumstances it is prayed that the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana [A.I.R (2003) SC 1386] may be invoked to bring to premature termination the prosecution against the petitioner herein. 2. The petitioner and the 1st respondent have entered appearance through counsel. A joint application for composition Crl.M.C. No.2833 of 2008 2 duly signed by the petitioner and the 1st respondent and countersigned by their counsel has already been filed. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent vouches for the fact that the matter has been settled and for the signature of the 1st respondent in the joint compromise petition. I am satisfied from the totality of circumstances that the disputes between the parties have been settled amicably and that the 1st respondent has compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner herein. If legally permissible, the composition can be accepted and the proceedings can be brought to premature termination. 3. But the offence under Section 498 A I.P.C is not legally compoundable. Counsel in these circumstances rightly place reliance on the decision in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana [A.I.R (2003) SC 1386] and Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 A.I.R SCW 2287]. 4. I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case that this is an eminently fit case where invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in the cases referred above, the prosecution against the petitioner can be brought to premature termination. Crl.M.C. No.2833 of 2008 3 5. It is submitted that proceedings against the sureties are pending under Section 446 Cr.P.C. The same must be brought to its logical conclusion. In that proceedings, the petitioner/sureties shall be entitled to urge all circumstances including the circumstance that the case has subsequently been brought to premature termination on compromise of the parties. 6. In the result: i) This Crl.M.C is, allowed; ii) C.C.No.1033 of 2001, against the petitioner pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Aluva, is hereby quashed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-