IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2804 of 2008()
1. SAJID, S/O.MOHAMAD, 34 YEARS,PURATHOOTU
... Petitioner
2. GALIBA, D/O.S.V.UZMAN, 24 YEARS,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.M.FIROZ
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :07/08/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
---------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO.2804 OF 2008
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of August, 2008.
O R D E R
Petitioners are the accused and defacto complainant
respectively in a prosecution for offences punishable inter alia
under Section 498 A of I.P.C. On the complaint of the second
petitioner, a crime was registered. After completing the
investigation, final report was filed. Cognizance was taken by the
learned Magistrate. Altogether there were three accused persons.
The petitioner is the first accused. The petitioner was not
available for trial. The other accused tried, were found not guilty
and acquitted. The case against the accused was split up and
refiled as C.C.No.157/2008 and that prosecution is still pending
before the learned JFCM, Payyoli.
2. At this stage, the first petitioner has come before this Court
along with the defacto complainant/2nd petitioner to apprise the
court of the fact that they have settled their dispute and that the
marital tie has been dissolved by Thalak. Parties have settled all
their disputes. The second petitioner has compounded the alleged
CRL.M.C.NO.2804/08 .
2
offence committed by the first petitioner. In these circumstances, it
is prayed that composition may be accepted and unnecessary and
superfluous surviving prosecution against the first petitioner may be
quashed.
3. I am satisfied from the submissions made at the Bar by the
learned counsel for the petitioners and the averments in the Crl.M.C
as also the affidavit filed by the second petitioner, that the parties
have settled their disputes voluntarily and there has been genuine
composition of the alleged offence committed by the first petitioner.
I am in these circumstances satisfied that,if legally permissible,
composition can be accepted and proceedings can be brought to
premature termination.
4. Offence under Section 498 A I.P.C is not legally compoundable.
Counsel in these circumstances rightly places reliance on the decision
in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana (A.I.R (2003) SC 1386). That
decision is authority for the proposition that the powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C are wide and sweeping and can be pressed into
service when the interests of justice so demand. The interests of
justice, it is held, may at times transcend the interests of mere law
CRL.M.C.NO.2804/08 .
3
and in such circumstances, the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C
cannot be reckoned as a fetter on the powers of the Court under
Section 482 Cr.P.C.
In the result:
a. This Crl.M.C. is allowed.
b. C.C.No.157/2008 pending before the JFCM, Payyoli
against the first petitioner is hereby quashed. Needless to say,
proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C if any pending must be
disposed of in accordance with law.
R. BASANT, JUDGE.
cl
CRL.M.C.NO.2804/08 .
4