IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2899 of 2008()
1. DENNY, AGED 30, S/O.DAVIS, VELLANI
... Petitioner
2. DAVIS, S/O.ANTONY AGED 60,
3. ALPHONSA, W/O.DAVIS, PERAMBRA VILLAGE
Vs
1. RESMY, D/O.CHIRAMMEL OUSEPHACHAN,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE S.I. OF
For Petitioner :SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
For Respondent :SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :06/08/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.2899 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of August, 2008
ORDER
The petitioners face indictment in a prosecution for
offences punishable, inter alia, under Sec.498A IPC.
Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final report
submitted by the police after due investigation. The 1st
respondent herein is the wife of the 1st petitioner and
daughter-in-law of petitioners 2 and 3. Proceedings were
initiated against the petitioners on the basis of the complaint of
the 1st respondent herein. Cognizance has been taken by the
learned Magistrate. Proceedings are pending before the
learned Magistrate. It is at this stage that the petitioners,
along with the 1st respondent, have come before this Court to
apprise this Court of the fact that the matrimonial disputes
have been settled and the spouses have decided to dissolve the
Crl.M.C. No.2899 of 2008 -: 2 :-
marriage and reside separately. The 1st respondent has settled
all the disputes with the petitioners and has compounded the
offences allegedly committed by the petitioners. An application
has been filed before the Family Court for dissolution of
marriage.
2. The petitioners as well as the 1st respondent report to
this Court that the disputes between them having been settled,
the continuance of the prosecution is irrelevant and
unnecessary. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the
surviving prosecution against the petitioners may be quashed.
An affidavit has been filed by the 1st respondent as Annexure-III
in which it is confirmed that the matter is settled between the
parties.
3. I am satisfied from the submissions made at the Bar by
the learned counsel for the contestants as also from the
documents produced that the disputes have been settled
between the parties willingly and voluntarily and the 1st
respondent has genuinely compounded the offences allegedly
committed by the petitioners. If legally permissible and possible,
the composition can be accepted and the premature termination
of the proceedings can be brought about, I am satisfied.
4. The offence under Sec.498A of the IPC is not
Crl.M.C. No.2899 of 2008 -: 3 :-
compoundable. But the learned counsel for the parties, in these
circumstances, rightly rely on the decision of the Supreme Court
in B.S. Joshy v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386). I am
satisfied that, relying on the said decision, powers under
Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked in the facts and
circumstances of the instant case where such invocation is found
to be eminently justified.
5. In the result:
(a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed.
(b) C.C.No.392/06 before the learned Judicial First Class
Magistrate, Irinjalakuda, against the petitioners is hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge
Crl.M.C. No.2899 of 2008 -: 4 :-