IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3689 of 2008()
1. SATHI, W/O. VASU, AGED 40 YEARS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
2. SAROJINI, D/O. VELAYUDHEN AGED 40 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.A.M.BABU
For Respondent :SRI.B.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :14/10/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
Crl.M.C.No.3689 of 2008
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of October 2008
O R D E R
The petitioner is the sole accused in a prosecution for
offences punishable under Sections 447,294(b) and 323 read
with 34 I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of a final
report submitted by the police after due investigation. All
offences alleged are compoundable except the offence
punishable under Section 294(b) I.P.C. The case is pending
before the learned Magistrate. At this stage, the
petitioner/accused and the respondent/complainant have come
before this court to apprise this court of the fact that they have
settled all their outstanding disputes and the second respondent/
de facto complainant has compounded all offences allegedly
committed by the petitioner/accused. The second respondent
has entered appearance through counsel. The counsel confirms
the fact of settlement and composition. An affidavit has been
filed by the second respondent duly attested by a counsel to
confirm that the disputes have been settled and the offences
alleged have been compounded.
Crl.M.C.No.3689/08 2
2. I am satisfied from the materials placed before me
that there has been a bona fide and genuine settlement of the
dispute between the parties and the second respondent has
compounded all offences allegedly committed by the petitioner.
But the offence under Section 294(b) I.P.C is not compoundable.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the
entire allegations were accepted, no offence under Section 294
(b) I.P.C would lie as the allegations only relate to intemperate
language used in the course of quarrel between two women. It is
submitted that even on merits allegation under Section 294(b)
I.P.C has no legs to stand on. The learned counsel for the
petitioner further submits that, at any rate, the matter has been
settled between the parties and invoking the dictum in Madan
Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [2008 AIR SCW 2287]
proceedings are liable to be brought to termination.
3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor.
The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. I
am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case that this
is an eminently fit case where powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C
as enabled by the dictum in Madan Mohan (Supra) can
Crl.M.C.No.3689/08 3
profitably be invoked to bring to premature termination the
prosecution against the petitioner herein.
4. In the result,
a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed.
b) C.C No.25/2007of pending before the learned J.F.M.C,
Irinjalakkuda where the second respondent is the de facto
complainant is hereby quashed.
c) Needless to say, the proceedings under Section 446
Cr.P.C, if any, pending against the petitioner and her sureties
shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate, in accordance
with law.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
Crl.M.C.No.3689/08 4
Crl.M.C.No.3689/08 5
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.C.No. of 2008
ORDER
09/07/2008