IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2353 of 2009()
1. MAJEED, S/O. BEERAN, AGED 35 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. NABEESA, W/O. BEERAN,
3. SALEENA, D/O. BEERAN,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. SABEENA M.J., D/O. JAFFAR, AGED 27 YRS,
For Petitioner :SRI.C.A.CHACKO
For Respondent :SRI.BENNY VARGHESE (THETTAYIL)
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.2353 of 2009
--------------------------
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.417/2009
on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s
Court-I, Aluva. First petitioner is the husband and
second respondent, the wife. Petitioners 2 and 3
are the mother and sister of the first petitioner.
Case as against the petitioners is that they
committed an offence under Section 498A of Indian
Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the
proceedings against them contending that
subsequently, there was a settlement of all the
disputes between the petitioners and second
respondent and they are now living together and in
such circumstances, it is not, in the interest of
justice, to continue the proceedings. Annexure-A3
affidavit of the second respondent is also filed,
along with the petition, to the effect that there
CRMC 2353/09 2
was a complete settlement of the disputes and along
with their two minor children, first petitioner and
second respondent are living under one roof.
2.Second respondent appeared through a counsel.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,
second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor
were heard.
3. Submissions of the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioners and second respondent and
Annexure-A3 affidavit of the second respondent
establish that the matrimonial disputes between the
first petitioner and second respondent were
amicably settled and they are now living together
along with their minor children. In such
circumstances, it is not, in the interest of
justice, to stand on technicalities and jeo pardise
the matrimonial cordial atmosphere, as held by the
Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003)
4 SCC 675). In view of the settlement of the
matrimonial disputes, when there is no possibility
of a conviction, it is not, in the interest of
CRMC 2353/09 3
justice, to proceed with the case.
Petition is allowed. C.C.No.417/2009 on the
file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-I,
Aluva as against the petitioners is quashed.
27th July, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv