IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 544 of 2007()
1. ALIKOYA, S/O. MOOSA,
... Petitioner
2. SHAMEER, S/O. ALIKOYA,
3. RASHID, S/O. ALIKOYA,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. MUNEERA, D/O. HUSSAINA,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :07/03/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO. 544 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of March, 2007
ORDER
The petitioners are accused 1 to 3 in a prosecution
initiated under Secs.498A and 406 read with Sec.34 of the
IPC. Proceedings were initiated on the basis of a complaint
filed by the 2nd respondent herein. That complaint filed
before the learned Magistrate was referred to the police under
Sec.156(3) of the Cr.P.C. A crime was registered and after
investigation, the final report was filed before the learned
Magistrate. Altogether, there were four accused shown in the
private complaint and the F.I.R. registered. The petitioners 1
to 3 herein are accused 1 to 3. They are the husband of the
2nd respondent and sons of the 1st petitioner in an earlier
marriage of his. The 4th accused shown in the F.I.R./
complaint was a neighbour.
2. The police, after investigation, filed a final report
dropping the 4th accused from the array of parties and
arraying the petitioners as accused 1 to 3. Cognizance was
CRL.M.C.NO. 544 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
taken by the learned Magistrate. The petitioners have already
appeared before the learned Magistrate, it is submitted.
3. The petitioners have now come to this Court along with
the 2nd respondent. They submit that the disputes have already
been settled between the parties amicably. Annexure-A2
agreement has been entered into between the 1st petitioner –
husband and the 2nd respondent – wife. All the disputes have
been harmoniously settled. The spouses have resumed
cohabitation. In these circumstances, continuance of the
prosecution has now become an unnecessary irritant in the
relationship between the parties. It is prayed, in these
circumstances, that the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. may
be invoked and the prosecution against the petitioners may be
quashed.
4. The 2nd respondent has entered appearance through
counsel. The 2nd respondent confirms that the matter has been
settled and the 2nd respondent has compounded the offences
allegedly committed by the petitioners. A joint statement has
been filed duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent
CRL.M.C.NO. 544 OF 2007 -: 3 :-
and counter signed by their respective counsel to satisfy the
court that such composition has been effected. The learned
counsel for the 2nd respondent vouches for the signature of the
2nd respondent in the joint application for composition.
5. I am satisfied from the material placed before me that
the parties have settled their disputes and the 2nd respondent/
complainant has compounded the offences allegedly committed
by the petitioners. I am further satisfied that this being a
matrimonial dispute, the prayer for premature termination of the
proceedings has got to be considered favourably if this Court has
such an option available in law. I do further note that the
offence under Sec.498A of the IPC is not compoundable; but the
counsel relies on the decision in B.S. Joshy v. State of
Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386). I am satisfied that following the
dictum in the said case, reckoning this as an exceptional case
where the interests of justice transcends the interests of mere
law, the prayer for quashing of proceedings on the basis of the
facts which have emerged subsequently can be accepted.
CRL.M.C.NO. 544 OF 2007 -: 4 :-
6. In the result:
(i) This Crl.M.C. is allowed.
(ii) C.C.No.263/04 pending before the learned Judicial
Magistrate of the First Class, Koyilandy, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
