DILEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.224/13 of Kurathikadu Police Station, which is initiated at the instance of the second respondent, who is the de facto complainant, alleging offences punishable under Sections 498 (A) and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners submit that the entire disputes between the first petitioner and the second respondent have already been settled and they have decided to file a petition for divorce on mutual consent under Section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The second respondent has also filed Annexure 2 affidavit before this Court stating that the entire dispute has been settled amicably and she does not want to prosecute the complaint made against the petitioners. Therefore, the prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash Crime No.224/13 on the file of the Kurathikadu Police Station.

(2.) HEARD , the learned counsel for petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent. Learned counsel for the second respondent submits that the second respondent has already settled the matter with the first petitioner and she does not want to prosecute the complaint made against the petitioners.

(3.) THE allegation made against petitioners is for commission of offences punishable under Sections 498(A) and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Now, the second respondent has filed Annexure 2 affidavit before this Court stating that the entire dispute has been amicably settled and she does not want to prosecute the matter further. In such circumstances, this is a fit case in which the proceedings in Crime No. 224/13 of the Kurathikadu Police Station can be quashed by this Court invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Sing's case supra.