IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 3469 of 2007()
1. PALLIPPARAMBA RYHANATH, AGED 27 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. KOYAKKARA PUTHIYA PURAYIL SATHAR,
3. KAYAKKARA PUTHIYA PURAYIL RUKHIYA,
4. KAYAKKARA PUTHIYA PURAYIL AFSATH,
5. KAYAKKARA PUTHIYA PURAYIL SUBAIR,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :19/11/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 3469 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2007
ORDER
The petitioners are the complainant and accused 1 to 4 in
a prosecution under Sec.498A of the IPC. Cognizance has
been taken by the learned Magistrate. The case is pending as
C.C. No.461/05 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First
Class, Payyannur. The petitioners together have come before
this Court to report to this Court that they have settled the
disputes between them. The 1st petitioner/wife and the 2nd
petitioner/husband have settled their disputes and have
resumed cohabitation, it is submitted. It is prayed that
invoking the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. the
settlement may be recognized and the composition may be
accepted. It is prayed that the premature termination of the
proceedings may be brought about by quashing the
Crl.M.C. No. 3469 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
proceedings.
2. The same counsel appears for all the petitioners. The
learned counsel submits that the matter has been settled. He
vouches on behalf of the 1st petitioner that there has been
settlement and composition. He vouches for the identity of the
1st petitioner/complainant also.
3. I am satisfied from the averments in the petition and the
submissions made at the Bar that the parties have willingly and
voluntarily settled their disputes. If legally permissible, I am
satisfied that the composition can be accepted and premature
termination of the proceedings can be brought about.
4. The offence under Sec.498A of the IPC is not
compoundable. But the learned counsel submits that the
decision in B.S. Joshy v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386)
justifies the invocation of the powers under Sec.482 of the
Cr.P.C. The rationale underlying the said decision is that the
interests of justice may at times transcend the interests of mere
law and in such exceptional cases powers under Sec.482 of the
Cr.P.C. can be invoked and Sec.320 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be a
fetter to the invocation of such power.
5. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where
the harmonious settlement of the disputes between the spouses
Crl.M.C. No. 3469 OF 2007 -: 3 :-
can be accepted and the proceedings brought to premature
termination.
6. In the result:
(i) This Crl.M.C. is allowed.
(ii) C.C.No.461/05 pending before the Judicial Magistrate
of the First Class, Payyannur, against the petitioners is hereby
quashed.
7. The prayer in the petition, it would appear, is only to
direct the learned Magistrate to dispose of the case after
withdrawing the non-bailable warrant issued against some of the
accused. In the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the
petitioners seeks the relief for quashing the proceedings.
8. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for
the petitioners.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge