IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3155 of 2009()
1. JERIN T.JAMES,
... Petitioner
2. T.P.JAMESKUTTY, S/O.PUNNOOSE,
3. MOLIKUTTY JAMES, W/O.T.P.JAMESKUTTY,
Vs
1. TEENA K.THOMAS, D/O.K.T.THOMAS,
... Respondent
2. STATE, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU
For Respondent :SRI.P.V.BALAKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :01/10/2009
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO. 3155 OF 2009
------------------------------------------
Dated 1st October 2009
O R D E R
Petitioners are accused and first
respondent, the de facto complainant in C.C.735/2008
on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate,
Changanacherry taken cognizance for the offence under
Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal
Code on Annexure-B final report. This petition is
filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure
to quash the proceedings, contending that entire
disputes were settled between the parties and
therefore, it is not in the interest of justice to
continue the prosecution.
2. First respondent appeared through a
counsel and filed Annexure-C affidavit stating that
the matrimonial disputes with petitioners were
amicably settled and in the matrimonial appeals
pending before this court, compromise was entered into
whereunder, first respondent has agreed to withdraw
the proceedings initiated for the offences under
Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code and in view of the
settlement she has no objection for quashing the
CRMC 3155/09 2
proceedings.
3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners,
first respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were
heard.
4. Annexure-B final report establish that
cognizance was taken for the matrimonial offences.
Affidavit filed by first respondent establish that
entire matrimonial disputes were amicably settled, when
the matrimonial appeal Nos.478/2009, 479/2009 and
480/2009 pending before this court were settled and in
view of the settlement, first respondent has no intention
to proceed against the petitioners.
5. As held by the Apex court in B.S.Joshi
and others v. State of Haryana and another (2003(4) SCC
675), when the matrimonial disputes are settled and
consequent to the settlement there is no likelihood of a
successful prosecution, it is not in the interest of
justice to continue the prosecution.
Petition is allowed. C.C.735/2008 on the file
of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Changanacherry is
quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.
CRMC 3155/09 3 uj.