High Court Kerala High Court

Prakash M. Maniyan vs State Of Kerala on 2 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
Prakash M. Maniyan vs State Of Kerala on 2 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2379 of 2008()


1. PRAKASH M. MANIYAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. LALITHA,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIVYA I. PONNAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.V.THAMBAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :02/07/2008

 O R D E R
                              R.BASANT, J
                      ------------------------------------
                     Crl.M.C. No.2379 of 2008
                      -------------------------------------
                Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008

                                  ORDER

Petitioners face allegations in a crime registered as Crime

No.202 of 2008 of Mannar Police Station for the offence

punishable under Section 498 A r/w 34 I.P.C. Petitioners are the

husband and mother in law of the 2nd respondent/defacto

complainant. Investigation is in progress. The learned Public

Prosecutor submits that in fact the investigation is already

complete and the final report has already been filed. The

petitioners along with the 2nd respondent have now appeared

before the Court to apprise this Court of the fact that all the

outstanding disputes between the petitioners and the 2nd

respondent have now been settled harmoniously. The spouses

have now resumed cohabitation and are living a happy and

peaceful matrimonial life. In these circumstances, it is prayed

that the settlement/composition may be taken note of judicially

and further proceedings in the crime may be brought to

premature termination invoking the extraordinary inherent

powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Crl.M.C. No.2379 of 2008 2

2. The 2nd respondent has entered appearance through

counsel. It is confirmed that the 2nd respondent herein is the

defacto complainant in Crime 202 of 2008 and that the matter

has been settled between the parties. They have resumed

harmonious cohabitation. The 2nd respondent has compounded

the offences allegedly committed by the petitioners.

3. I am satisfied from the submissions made at the Bar

and from the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent that there has

been a voluntary and genuine settlement of the disputes and

composition of the offences by the 2nd respondent. If legally

possible and permissible, I am satisfied that the composition can

be accepted and the proceedings against the petitioners can be

brought to premature termination.

4. But the offence under Section 498 A I.P.C is not legally

compoundable. Counsel, in these circumstances, rely on the

decision in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana [A.I.R (2003) SC

1386].

5. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The

learned Public Prosecutor submits that the State has no objection

against quashing of proceedings against the petitioner.

Crl.M.C. No.2379 of 2008 3

6. I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this

case, that this is an eminently fit case where the extraordinary

inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to

bring to premature termination the proceedings against the

petitioners.

7. In the result:

i) This Crl.M.C is, allowed;

ii) Crime No.202 of 2008 of Mannar Police Station, final

report, if any filed in that crime and all further proceedings

against the petitioners are hereby quashed.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-