S SAJI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FIRST petitioner is son of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 and brother of petitioner Nos.4 and 5. Petitioner No.6 is the husband of petitioner No.4. They are accused in crime No.268 of 2007 of the Thiruvallam police and C.C. No.162 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial FIRST Class Magistrate-II, Neyyattinkara for offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC"). Petitioners seek to quash the proceedings against them on the ground of settlement of dispute with respondent No.2, the de facto complainant and wife of petitioner No.1. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner, respondent No.2 and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that in the final report there is reference to causing miscarriage of respondent No.2 though with the consent of respondent No.2. Learned Public Prosecutor confirmed the fact of settlement. In response it is contended by learned counsel for petitioners that as seen from Annexure-I, final report learned Magistrate has not taken cognisance for any offence other than under Sec.498A read with Sec.34 of the IPC. That statement is found to be correct in view of the endorsement in Annexure-I, final report though there is reference in the final report about miscarriage.

(2.) IT is seen from Annexure-II, compromise petition that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have settled the dispute and accordingly petitioner No.1 agreed to pay respondent `.1,75,000/- to respondent No.2. Term of the settlement is that the Demand Draft for the said amount will be produced before the Family Court where civil disputes are pending. Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have agreed to separate and it is submitted that accordingly petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have filed a joint petition before the Family Court under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and are awaiting orders on the said petition.