LAWS(KER)-2015-4-152

AJEESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

Decided On April 24, 2015
Ajeesh Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA And ORS. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed by the sole accused in C.C. No. 1338 of 2014 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court - II, Attingal to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement under Sec. 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the Code).

(2.) The case of the petitioner in the petition was that, the petitioner has married the second respondent and they lived as husband and wife for sometime. At the time of marriage, 100 sovereigns of gold ornaments, a car and some cash were given. Due to some mis -understanding between the parties, they started living separately, which lead to the filing of a private complaint by second respondent, against the petitioner and his relatives, alleging offence under Sec. 498A read with Sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code, which was forwarded to the police by the learned Magistrate for an investigation under Sec. 156(3) of the Code and Annexure -1, First Information Report was registered as Crime No. 773 of 2013 of Managalapuram police station, against the petitioner and others alleging offence under Sec. 498A read with Sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code. After investigation, Annexure -2 Final Report (wrongly shown as Annexure -I in the petition) was filed against the petitioner alone, alleging offence under Sec. 498A and it was taken on file as C.C. No. 1338/2014 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court -II, Attingal. The matter has been settled between the parties and they have decided to separate and they filed a joint petition for divorce and that is pending. In view of the settlement, the second respondent is not interested in further prosecuting the petitioner. Since it is a non -compoundable offence, they cannot file application before the court below. No purpose will be served by proceedings against the petitioner as well, and as no conviction is possible in this case. So the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this court for the following relief:

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.