IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4226 of 2010() ------------------- CC.285/2002 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR .................. PETITIONER : -------------------- MUTHARI ABDUL SALAM, S/O.V.M.ALI MUHAMMED HAJI, MATTOOL AMSOM DESOM, MATTOOL P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAYANGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN- 670 358. 2. SEMAN SAHIDA, D/O.SRI.ARAKKAL ABDUL KAREEM, NEAR THANGALE PALLI, MATTOOL AMSOM, DESOM, MATTOOL P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 302. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. R1 & R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD R2 BY ADVS. SRI.E.N.VISHNU NAMBOODIRI SRI.N.N.ELAYATH SRI.ROY THOMAS (MUVATTUPUZHA) SRI.S.P.SURESH KUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4226 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 21st December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the accused and second respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.285/2002 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code on Annexure-B final report. 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. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit Crmc 4226/10 2 stating that entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and consequent to the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. As held by the Apex in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675), when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. Affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes that all the matrimonial disputes are settled amicably. Consequently, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.285/2002 on Crmc 4226/10 3 the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.