IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN THURSDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 3556 OF 2024 CRIME NO.943/2016 OF KUMILY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.235 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, PEERUMEDU PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 AND 2:

1 JAFFER SADIK ALI AGED 43 YEARS S/O. YUSUF DOOR NO 160/13, KALA RAVUTHAR RICE MILL 2ND STREET, BHADRAKALIYAMMAN KOVIL, CUMBUM TAMIL NADU, PIN - 625516

2 RASIYA BEEGUM AGED 63 YEARS W/O. YUSUF DOOR NO 160/13, KALA RAVUTHAR RICE MILL 2ND STREET, BHADRAKALIYAMMAN KOVIL, CUMBUM TAMIL NADU, PIN - 625516 BY ADV ARUN KUMAR M.A RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

2 SAJIRA LATHEEF AGED 31 YEARS W/O. JAFFER SADIK ALI KADAMPAPADICKAL HOUSE, KUMILY P.O.

IDUKKI, PIN - 685509 BY ADV SOBIN SOMAN SRI.RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

13.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2024 This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash Annexure A1 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.235/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Peermade, arose out of Crime No.943/2016 of Kumily Police Station, Idukki. The petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the above case.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the de-facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. In this matter, offence punishable under Section

498A read with Section 34 of IPC is alleged to have been committed by the accused. The complainant is none other than the wife of the 1^st accused.

4. It is submitted that the matter has been amicably settled and the 2^nd respondent/de-facto complainant filed affidavit in this regard in a case involving matrimonial dispute.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and statement of the de-facto complainant to that effect has been recorded.

6. Since the dispute has been settled in between husband and wife, there is no reason to disallow the prayer for quashment, so as to facilitate peaceful living of the parties hereinafter. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to allow this petition.

In the result, this petition stands allowed and Annexure A1 Final Report and all further proceedings in C.C.No.235/2018 on he files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Peermade, arose out of Crime No.943/2016 of Kumily Police Station, Idukki, stand quashed.

Sd/-

A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE nkr APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3556/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.235/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PEERMADE DATED

25.09.2017.

ANNEXURE A2 THE NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23.03.2024 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES : NIL