IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 3494 of 2007()
1. SAJIL, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
2. SHEEBA, D/O.THANKAPPAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :23/11/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 3494 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2007
O R D E R
The petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant
who is arrayed as the second respondent in this case. The second
respondent had filed an F.I. statement before the Panangad
police, which is registered as Crime No.376 of 2006. The
petitioner is alleged to have committed the offence punishable
under section 498A I.P.C. Investigation is in progress.
2. The petitioner has now appeared before this court
along with the second respondent to inform the court that the
disputes between them have all been settled amicably. The
second respondent has compounded the offence under Section
498A I.P.C. allegedly committed by the petitioner. In these
circumstances, the composition may be accepted and the F.I.R.
registered against the petitioner and all further action taken may
be quashed, it is prayed.
Crl.M.C.No. 3494 of 2007
2
3. The second respondent has entered appearance through
counsel. The second respondent has filed an affidavit duly attested by
the counsel, in which it is confirmed that there has been a settlement
and composition as asserted by the petitioner.
4. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor. He also submits
that the State has no objection against the quashing of the F.I.R. in the
given circumstances.
5. The offence under Section 498A I.P.C. is not compoundable.
But the dictum in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC
1386) clearly shows that notwithstanding the fact that the offence is not
compoundable, in the interests of matrimonial harmony and
unnecessary disputes between the parties the composition can be
accepted and premature termination of the proceedings can be brought
about by the invocation of the extra ordinarily inherent jurisdiction
under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
6. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where such
powers ought to be invoked and the parties saved of the further trauma
of continuation of the proceedings.
Crl.M.C.No. 3494 of 2007
3
7. This Crl.M.C. is accordingly allowed. Crime No.376 of 2006
of Panangad police station against the petitioner at the instance of the
second respondent under Section 498A I.P.C. is hereby quashed.
(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm