IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4597 of 2010() ----------------------------------------- (C.C.NO.20/07 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT V, KOZHIKODE) .................... (CRIME NO.57/06 OF FEROKE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE) .... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ 1. ROJO JOSEPH, ADVOCATE, THURUTHIPARA HOUSE, KANNAMBRA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. T.M.JOSEPH, THURUTHIPARA HOUSE, ..DO.... 3. LISSY JOSEPH, W/O.T.M.JOSEPH, ..DO.... BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. NISHANTHI P.U., POOTHATTAPARAMBIL, VYDHARANGADY P.O., KOZHIKODE. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM 2 BY ADV. JOSE THOMAS (PALA) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.4597 OF 2010 = = = = = = = = = = == Dated: 19th day of November, 2010 ORDER Petitioners, who are the accused in C.C. No.20/2007 on the file of the J.F.C.M. Court-V, Kozhikode for offences punishable under Secs. 323, 324, 403, 406 and 498(A) read with 34 I.P.C, seek to quash the proceedings against them on the ground that the marital partners have subsequently settled their disputes. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent / de facto complainant submit that the dispute has been settled between the marital partners in this prosecution mainly for an offence under Section 498(A) I.P.C. In the light of the subsequent settlement of the dispute between the marital partners, the petitioners have approached this Court by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Having regard to the resolution of the disputes between the marital partners, continuance of the criminal prosecution against the petitioners is an avoidable irritant. 3. Eventhough the offence under Section 498 A I.P.C. is not compoundable, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386), the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked by this Court to bring about a premature termination of the prosecution. Crl.M.C.No.4597 OF 2010 2 Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. C.C.No.20/2007 pending before the J.F.C.M. Court-V, Kozhikkode, shall stand quashed. V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE). dmb