IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 585 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CC.434/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-I, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ---------------------- BHASKARAN, S/O.GOVINDAN NADAR, AGED 63 YEARS, (RETD GOVT.EMPLOYEE) VADAKKEVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, CHERIKKONAM, VETTINADU VEMBAYAM, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT NARAYANA SADANAM, TC 7/183, KANJIRAMPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.P.K.MUHAMMED MR.M.ABDUL RASHEED RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------- 1. LATHIKA, D/O.PANKAJAKSHI, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT VADAKKEVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, VETTINADU CHERRIKKONAM, VEMBAYAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGADU TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- CRL.M.C.No. 585 OF 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is field with a prayer to quash all proceedings in C.C. 434/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangad. The accusation against the petitioner is that he has committed an offence under Section 498 A of the IPC. The matter has been settled between the parties and an affidavit is filed by the wife to the effect that all differences has been sorted out and they have decided to live separately and to file a joint petition for divorce and she does not want to continue the prosecution under Section 498 A. The methodology in such type of cases had been decided by the apex court in the decision reported in B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana [2003 (4) SCC 675]. The apex court held that: “While exercising inherent power of quashing under Section 482, it is for the High Court to take into consideration any special features which appear in a particular case to consider whether it is expedient and in the interest of justice to permit a prosecution to continue. The special features in such matrimonial Crl.M.C. 585/2009 -2- matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.” The apex court further held that: “The hyper technical view would be counterproductive and would act against the interests of women and against the object for which his provision was added”. Taking into consideration the dictum laid down therein and all facts, it is clear that the parties had settled the matter and they have parted as good friends. So there is no necessity to continue this prosecution. Therefore it is a fit case where the powers under Section 482 Crl.P.C can be invoked. Therefore the Crl.M.C is allowed and all the proceedings pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Nedumangad in CC 434/2007 is quashed. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm