High Court Kerala High Court

Murichundi Ubaid vs State Of Kerala on 22 December, 2010

Kerala High Court
Murichundi Ubaid vs State Of Kerala on 22 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 5031 of 2010()


1. MURICHUNDI UBAID,S/O.MUSA,AGED 32 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MURICHUNDI KUNJAHAMMED,D/O.MUSA,
3. HAJIRA,W/O.KUNJAHAMMAD,AGED 35 YEARS,
4. SULEKHA,W/O.KUNJABDULLA,AGED 42 YEARS,
5. MOIDU,S/O.MUSA,AGED 47 YEARS,POLITHOLLY,
6. GAFOOR,S/O.MUSA,AGED 4O YEARS,

                        Vs



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

2. RAFIYA,D/O.ANTHU,AGED 23 YEARS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.M.HABEEB

                For Respondent  :SMT.JYOTHI JOSEPH

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :22/12/2010

 O R D E R
               M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
              --------------------------
                Crl.M.C.No.5031 of 2010
              --------------------------

                         ORDER

Petitioners are the accused and second respondent,

the defacto complainant in C.C.No.428/2009 on the file

of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Vadakara,

taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A of

Indian Penal Code on Annexure-1 final report. This

petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal

Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that

entire matrimonial disputes were settled amicably and

consequent to the settlement, it is not in the interest

of justice to continue the prosecution.

2. Second respondent appeared through a counsel

and filed an affidavit stating that entire matrimonial

disputes were settled amicably and therefore,

permission is to be granted to compound the offence.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,

second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were

heard.

4. An offence under Section 498A of Indian Penal

Code is not compoundable. Hence, permission cannot be

CRMC 5031/10 2

granted to compound the offence. But, as held by the

Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4

SCC 675), when the matrimonial disputes are settled

amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand

on technicalities and continue the prosecution. The

affidavit filed by the second respondent establishes

that she has settled all the matrimonial disputes with

the petitioners. In such circumstances, it is not in

the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.

Petition is allowed. C.C.No.428/2009 on the file

of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Vadakara is

quashed.

22nd December, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv