ORDER

The prayer in the aforecaptioned Crl.M.C filed under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C is as follows :

“................ to Quash the final report in Crime No.1568/2018 of Karamana Police Station, now pending as C.C 678/2019 before the Honourable Judicial 1st class Magistrate Court-1 Thiruvananthapuram, in the interest of justice”

2. Heard Ms.A.S.Uthara, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (lady de facto complainant), Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for official respondent Nos.1 to 3 & Sri.Gajendra Singh Rajpurohit, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondent No.4 (accused).

3. The petitioner herein had married the 4th respondent. Later, the matrimonial disputes arose between them and it led to the initiation and registration of the impugned First Information Report in Crime No.1568/2018 of Karamana Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, on the basis of the First Information Statement by the petitioner (de facto complainant), in which the petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused therein, for offences punishable under Secs.498A, 294(b) & 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The police after investigation have filed the impugned Annexure-A1 final report/charge sheet in the said Crime No.1568/2018 of Karamana Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram and after taking cognizance, the case is now pending as calendar case, C.C.No.678/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Thiruvananthapuram.

4. Now from the submissions of Ms.A.S.Uthara, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (lady de facto complainant) and Sri.Gajendra Singh Rajpurohit, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondent No.4 (accused), it appears that wisdom has ultimately dawned on these spouses who have been warring for quite some time and it also appears that they have decided to call off the battle in between the spouses and that peace and happiness through a contended marital life would be the better option, instead of continuing the battle between the spouses. From the submissions of the learned advocates, it appears that the entire disputes between these battling spouses has now been resolved and they have decided to live together to continue their marital relationship in harmony and peace. Accordingly, Ms.A.S.Uthara, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (lady de facto complainant) would submit that her party is fully prepared to let bygones be bygones and has also decided to ensure that the continuance of the impugned criminal proceedings in this case, would be hindrance to their contended marital life and that she is no longer interested to continue the impugned prosecution measures.

5. Sri.Gajendra Singh Rajpurohit, learned counsel appearing for contesting respondent No.4 (accused) would submit that the allegations, which forms the basis for the impugned criminal proceedings were made at a time when the spouses were having matrimonial disputes on account of temperamental differences and the allegations were made in the context of misunderstandings. Further, the learned advocates appearing for the abovesaid spouses would submit that they are now living together under one roof and that this Court may quash the impugned criminal proceedings on account of the settlement of disputes between them, as otherwise it would stand in the way of their harmonious marital relationship, etc. This Court has held in Ayshath Muneera Hameed.T.M v. Chikkilodancheriya Kooveri Davood and anr. [2017 (2) KLT 617 = 2017 (2) KHC 799] that in cases involving offences as per Sec.498A of the IPC, which has arisen finally on account of the matrimonial disputes between spouses, even the de facto complainant can maintain petition under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings for such offences on the ground of settlement of the disputes between spouses, etc.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor was earlier requested to get instructions in the matter and today when the matter has been ta