IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 602 of 2006(A) -------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.10/2006 OF MAVELIKARA POLICE STATION) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED IN CRIME NO.10/2006: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SURESHKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT THULASI BHAVANAM, PENNUKKARA P.O., CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR SRI.C.S.DIAS SRI.AJITH MURALI 1ST RESPONDENT:COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NO.10/2006: 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT IN CRIME NO.10/2006: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SAJITHA SIVAPRASAD, W/O.SIVAPRASAD, AGED 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT POOTHARAYIL HOUSE, ALA VADAKKUMMURI, ALA VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB FOR R1 ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP FOR R2 SRI.LEEJOY MATHEW.V. FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C. No.602 of 2006 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of December, 2008 ORDER Petitioner is the sole accused and he faces indictment in a prosecution for the offence punishable under Section 365 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report submitted by the police in Crime No.10 of 2006 of Mavelikkara Police Station. When this petition was filed, the matter was at the crime stage. Subsequently final report has been filed. Cognizance has been taken and the case is pending as C.C.No.693 of 2008 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Mavelikkara. 2. It is now reported that the parties have settled their disputes. The offence alleged is the one punishable under Section 365 I.P.C, which is a non compoundable offence. But the parties have come to a settlement. The respondent/defacto complainant has appeared before this Court through a counsel. An affidavit has been filed by her to confirm that the disputes have been settled and the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner has been compounded. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. The offence is one which is purely Crl.M.C. No.602 of 2006 2 personal and private between the parties. No issue of public justice or public interest is directly involved. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the 2nd respondent pray, the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 (3) KLT 19], Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I [2008(3) KLT 769 (SC)] and Manoj Sharma v. State [2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC)] can safely be invoked to bring to premature termination this prosecution against the petitioner, which has now become unnecessary and irrelevant. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C is allowed; b) C.C.No.693 of 2008 pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Mavelikkara, in which the petitioner is the accused and the 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant, is hereby quashed; c) Needless to say, proceedings, if any, pending against the petitioner and his sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C, shall be disposed of in accordance with law. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-