BALAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner and the 2nd respondent are spouses. Against the petitioner, a prosecution is pending, inter alia, under Section 498 A I.P.C. Proceedings were initiated on the basis of a complaint of the 2nd respondent. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police after due investigation. Parties have now settled their disputes. All outstanding disputes have been settled harmoniously. In these circumstances, both of them have come before this Court with a prayer that the prosecution initiated against the petitioner may be quashed. The petitioner has not appeared before learned Magistrate. The case against him is pending in the list of Long Pending Cases.

(2.) The parties have filed a joint application for composition. The respondent is represented by counsel. The application for composition is duly signed by the rival contestants and counter signed by their counsel. I am satisfied from the submissions made at the Bar and the documents produced that the parties have settled their disputes amicably and the complainant/2nd respondent has compounded the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner. If legally permissible, I am satisfied, that the composition can be accepted and the proceedings brought to premature termination.

(3.) The offence punishable under Section 498 A I.P.C is not legally compoundable. The counsel hence rightly relies on the dictum in B.S.Joshy v. State of Haryana [A.I.R (2003) S.C 1386]. That decision is authority for composition though in an exceptional case interests of justice may transcend the interests of mere law. Powers under Section 320 I.P.C cannot be held to fetter the sweep of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I am satisfied, that this is an eminently fit case where the proceedings deserve to be brought to premature termination by invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.