Prabhakaran Nair vs Pushpakumari on 10 September, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2738 of 2007()


1. PRABHAKARAN NAIR, S/O.LATE NARAYANAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. PUSHPAKUMARI, D/O.LATE VASUDEVAN PILLA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :10/09/2007

 O R D E R
                              R.BASANT, J
                    = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                       Crl.M.C.No.2738 of 2007
                   = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

              Dated this the 10th day of September, 2007

                                 ORDER

The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.469/2002, pending

before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chittur, on the basis of

a private complaint filed by the 1st respondent- de facto complainant,

alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498A IPC .

2. The petitioner and the first respondent have now come before

this court with a prayer that the prosecution initiated by the 1st

respondent- de facto complainant before the learned Magistrate may

now be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The

parties have settled their disputes amicably. The Spouses have

resumed cohabitation and are residing harmoniously after the

commencement of the proceedings. In these circumstances, the

unnecessary continuance of the criminal prosecution against the

petitioner is an avoidable irritant in their relationship. The 1st

respondent has entered appearance through counsel. The petitioner

and the 1st respondent have filed a joint statement asserting the

matter has been settled between the parties. The learned counsel

vouch for the fact of composition. Both counsel pray that the

proceedings initiated by the 1st respondent may now be quashed.

Crl.M.C.No.2738 of 2007
2

3. I am satisfied from the averments made in the petition,

submissions made at the Bar and from the joint statement filed by the

petitioner and the 1st respondent, that the parties have willingly and

voluntarily settled their disputes amicably.

4. However, the offence under Section 498A I.P.C is not

legally compoundable under Sec.320 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel, in

these circumstances, rightly rely on the decision in B.S.Joshi vs. State

of Haryana [AIR 2003 SC 1386]. That decision is authority for the

proposition that the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C are not fettered

by the stipulations of Sec.320 Cr.P.C.

5. I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the

dictum in B.S.Joshi vs. State of Haryana [AIR 2003 SC 1386] can be

invoked in the interests of justice. The interests of justice may at times

transcend the interest of mere law. I am satisfied that the prayer of

the petitioner and 2nd respondent can be accepted.

6. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed.

C.C.No.469/2002 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,

Chittur, against the petitioner herein is hereby quashed.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
sj
/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Crl.M.C.No.2738 of 2007
3