Loading...

Byju @ Biju vs State Of Kerala on 27 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
Byju @ Biju vs State Of Kerala on 27 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2417 of 2009()


1. BYJU @ BIJU, S/O.SAMUEL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. SHINY BIJU, W/O.BIJU,

3. S.I. OF POLICE, KOIPURAM.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW

                For Respondent  :SRI.JAIBY PAUL

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :27/07/2009

 O R D E R
               M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
              --------------------------
                Crl.M.C.No.2417 of 2009
              --------------------------

                         ORDER

Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.105/2008

on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court,

Pathanamthitta. Second respondent is his wife. Chief

Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence

under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal

Code as against the petitioner and accused 2 and 3 on

Annexure-2 final report. As petitioner was absconding,

accused 2 and 3 were tried by the Magistrate and under

Annexure-3 judgment, they were acquitted, finding them

not guilty of the offence. This petition is filed under

Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the

proceedings contending that the dispute with the second

respondent was amicably settled and they are now living

together and in view of the settlement, it is not, in

the interest of justice, to continue the proceedings.

2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel

and filed an affidavit stating that the dispute with

the petitioner was settled and she is now living with

CRMC 2417/09 2

the petitioner, along with their children.

3. Crl.M.Appl.No.4130/2009 is also jointly filed

by the petitioner and second respondent for permission

to compound the offence. But as an offence under

Section 498A of Indian Penal Code is not compoundable,

permission cannot be granted to compound the offence.

4. As declared by the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v.

State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), when matrimonial

dispute was settled between the husband and wife and

they are living together along with their children, it

is not, in the interest of justice to stand on

technicalities and jeo pardise the matrimonial

settlement arrived at by the husband and wife.

Hence, petition is allowed. C.C.No.105/2008 on the

file of Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court,

Pathanamthitta as against the petitioner is quashed.

27th July, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information