Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.116 of 2014 of Maradu Police Station. The petitioner is charged with offences punishable under Sections 354, 452 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18.01.2014 the accused and daughter of the defacto complainant had undergone betrothal ceremony and thereafter, the accused compelled her to give back the ring put by him during the betrothal ceremony, virtually retracting from the marriage proposal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 and also the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 that the matter has been settled between the accused and the defacto complainant and Annexures 5 and 6 are the affidavits filed by the defacto complainant and his daughter. They have stated that they do not have any subsisting grievance against the accused. It is also submitted that the marriage of the defacto complainant's daughter is to take place tomorrow. Considering the facts and circumstances, I find that the Crl.MC No.2486/2014 2 prosecution of the case will result in miscarriage of justice.
In the result, Annexure-A2 FIR in Crime No. 116 of 2014 of Maradu Police Station is hereby quashed.
A. HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
cks