High Court Kerala High Court

Boban Thomas vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 8 February, 2010

Kerala High Court
Boban Thomas vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 8 February, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 270 of 2010()


1. BOBAN THOMAS, S/O. THOMAS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THOMAS, S/O. ULAHANNAN,

                        Vs



1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. TWINKLE GEORGE, W/O. BOBAN THOMAS,

3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.HANSON.P.MATHEW

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :08/02/2010

 O R D E R

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

————————————-
Cr. MC No.270 of 2010

————————————-
Dated 8th February 2010

Order

In this proceedings under S.482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the petitioner wants to give a quietus

to the proceedings in CC No.173/08, pending before the

JFCM Court-II, Thamarassery.

2. The petitioners are the accused in CC

No.173/08 on the file of the JFCM Court-II, Thamarassery

for having committed the offences punishable under

Ss.406 & 498A r/w 34 IPC. After investigation, the final

report was laid and cognizance was taken by the Court

concerned.

3. It is unnecessary to go into the details of the

case in the light of the manner in which this petition is

proposed to be disposed of.

4. A petition has been filed before this Court by

the defacto complainant pointing out that all issues have

CRMC 270/10 2

been settled between the parties and she has no further

grievance in the matter. This Court is also given to

understand that the couple is living together as of now. In

view of the above, the learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that it is only proper that this Court gives a quietus

to the proceedings in the case.

5. True, the offence under S.498A may not be

compoundable. But, the fact remains that the parties have

settled their disputes and the complainant has no further

grievance in the matter. Therefore, no purpose will be

served by continuing the proceedings in the above said

crime. In the light of the decisions in Madan Mohan Abbot

v. State of Punjab (2008(3) KLT 19 SC) and Manoj

Sharma v. State (2008(4) KLT 417), it is only proper that

the proceedings are given a quietus. In the result, this

petition is allowed and the proceedings in CC No.173/08,

pending before the JFCM Court-II, Thamarassery stand

CRMC 270/10 3

quashed and all further proceedings shall stand dropped.





                              P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE



sta

CRMC 270/10    4