IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4342 of 2010() ------------------------------------ CC.241/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MAVELIKKARA .................... PETITIONER(S)/ 3RD ACCUSED --------------------------------------------- RAJAN, AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, RAJA BHAVAN, PELA MURI, KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA - REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. * ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED ADDL.R2: “ NEJI, KALATHIL VEEDU, PELA MURI, KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE MAVELIKKARA. PIN- 690 101-IMPLEADED *AS ADDL.R2 AS PER ORDER DATED 2/11/2010 IN CRL.MA 6944/2010. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V.PRAMOD R2 BY SRI.V.VIJULAL THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4342 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 1st December, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner was third accused in C.C.241/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikara. As he was absconding, case against him was re-filed as C.C.14/2009. By Annexure-A6 judgment accused 2 and 5 were acquitted. Offence against accused 1 and 4 were recorded abated by Annexure-A6 judgment. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings against the petitioner contending that entire disputes were settled with the second respondent, the de facto complainant. 2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that Crmc 4342/10 2 she has settled all the disputes with the petitioner and she has no objection for quashing the proceedings in C.C.14/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikara. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 4. Though petition shows that petitioner is the third accused in C.C.241/2008, Annexure-A6 judgment shows that as he was absconding, the case against him was split up and re-filed as C.C.14/2009. Annexure- A6 judgment also shows that offence against accused 1 and 4 were abated and accused2 and 5 were acquitted on evidence, based on a settlement between the parties. 5. Affidavit filed by the second Crmc 4342/10 3 respondent establishes that she has settled all the disputes with the petitioner as held by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC 675) and Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008 (3) KLT 19 (SC), when matrimonial disputes and all other disputes were settled between the petitioner and second respondent, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.14/2009 on the filed Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Mavelikkara against petitioner, the original third accused is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.