SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Against Cc 612/2013 Of . vs Shan P.Saleem @ Shan on 23 February, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/4TH PHALGUNA, 1938

Crl.MC.No. 7078 of 2015 ()

AGAINST CC 612/2013 of J.M.F.C.-II(FOREST OFFENCES),PUNALUR
CRIME NO. 1307/2011 OF PUNALUR POLICE STATION , KOLLAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:

1. SHAN P.SALEEM @ SHAN, AGED 43 YEARS
S/O. SALIM, RESIDING AT SHAN MANZIL, PLACHERI,
VALACODE VILLAGE, PUNALUR, PATHANAPURAM,
KOLLAM -691 305.

2. SALIM, AGED 60 YEARS
SHAN MANZIL, PLACHERI, VALACODE VILLAGE,
PUNALUR, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM -691 305.

3. PARISHA BEEVI, AGED 54 YEARS,
W/O. SALIM, SHAN MANZIL, PLACHERI, VALACODE VILLAGE,
PUNALUR, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM -691 305.

4. SHEMI,
S/O. SALIM, SHAN MANZIL, PLACHERI,
VALACODE VILLAGE, PUNALUR, PATHANAPURAM,
KOLLAM -691 305.

BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.682031

2. NISHA,
W/O. SHAN P. SALIM, SHAN MANZIL,
PLACHERI, VALACODE VILLAGE, PUNALUR, PATHANAPURAM,
KOLLAM – 691 305, NOW RESIDING AT PEERU VEDU,
PETTA, KOZHENCHERI, PATHANAMTHITTA.689641

R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.SHAMSUDEEN
R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.SHAJ
R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJJU.S
R2 BY ADV. SRI.RENJIT GEORGE
R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.VISHNU (ARIKKATTIL)
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-
02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 7078 of 2015 ()

APPENDIX:

PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE FIR NO.1307/11 OF PUNALUR POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM.

ANNEXURE 2: COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.612/2013 ON THE FILE
OF the JFCM II, PUNALUR.

RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A. TO JUDGE.

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J

Crl.M.C. No. 7078 of 2015

Dated 23rd February, 2017

ORDER

1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure ( ‘the Code” for brevity ) with a prayer

to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioners.

2.On the basis of an FIR lodged by the 2nd respondent, who

is the wife of the 1st petitioner, Crime No.1307 of 2011 of

the Thirurangadi Police Station was registered and

investigation was taken up for offences punishable under

Sections 494, 498A and 109 read with Section 34 of the

IPC, and on its completion final report was laid before the

Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Punalur, where the

same is pending as C.C.No.612 of 2013. The petitioners 2

to 4 are the relatives of the 1st petitioner.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as

well as the learned Public Prosecutor. It is submitted that

Crl.M.C. No.7078 of 2015 -2-

various other proceedings were pending between the

parties and the parties have managed to resolve their

disputes through mediation held at the Family Court,

Kottarakkara. An agreement has been entered into

between the parties and its terms have been acted upon.

In terms of the agreement, affidavit of the 2nd respondent

has been placed on record, wherein she asserts that she

has no grievance against the petitioners.

4.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions

has submitted that the statement of the party

respondent has been recorded and she has stated in

unequivocal terms that the settlement arrived at is

genuine.

5.It is by now settled that it is the duty of the courts to

encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. If

the parties ponder over their faults and terminate their

disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting

Crl.M.C. No.7078 of 2015 -3-

it out in a court of law, there is no reason why this Court

should hesitate to exercise its powers under section 482 of

the Code. Permitting such proceedings to continue would

be nothing but an abuse of process of court. The dispute is

clearly private and no public interest is involved.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-

2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against

the petitioners now pending as C.C.No.612 of 2013 on the

file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Punalur are

quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V.,
JUDGE

kp/17.02.17

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation