IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 8TH MAGHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 8407 of 2018
CRIME NO.444/2018 OF EDATHALA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AIMULLA, AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O.SAIDUMUHAMMED, KOLLAMKUDY HOUSE, EDATHALA KARA,
ALUVA EAST VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.AJEESH M UMMER
RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.
2 SAMANTHA, AGED 32 YEARS,
W/O.AIMULLA, KOLLAMKUDY HOUSE,
MALIYEKKAPPADY BHAGHAM, EDATHALA KARA,
ALUVA EAST VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683561.
BY ADV. SMT.SIKHA G.NAIR
SRI. AMJAD ALI – SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
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 petitioner.
2. The 2nd respondent is the wife of the petitioner herein.
Their marriage was solemnized on 25.4.2004 and there were
living together. In the course of their connubial relationship,
serious disputes cropped up. According to the prosecution, the
petitioner subjected the de facto complainant to physical as well
as mental harassment demanding dowry and thereby
misappropriated huge sums of money and gold ornaments. At the
instance of the 2nd respondent, Crime No.444 of 2018 was
registered at the Edathala Police Station under Sections 498A,
324, and 506 of the IPC.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submitted that at the instance of well wishers and relatives, the
parties have decided to put an end to their discord. It is urged
that the dispute is purely private in nature. The learned counsel
appearing for the 2nd respondent, invited the attention of this
Court to the affidavit filed by her and asserts that the disputes
inter se have been settled and the continuance of criminal
proceedings will only result in gross inconvenience and hardship.
It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has no objection in
allowing the prayer sought for.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions
has submitted that the statement of the 2 nd respondent has been
recorded and she has stated in unequivocal terms that the
settlement arrived at is genuine.
5. I have considered the submissions advanced.
6. In Gian singh v. State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC
303] and in Narinder singh v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC
466], the Apex Court has laid down that in appropriate cases, the
High Court can take note of the amicable resolution of disputes
between the victim and the wrongdoer to put an end to the
criminal proceedings. Further in Jitendra Raghuvanshi
Others v. Babita Raghuvanshi Another [(2013) 4 SCC 58],
it was observed 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 it out in a court of law, the courts
should not 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 interest of justice
also require that the proceedings be quashed.
7. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am
of the considered view that this Court will be well justified in
invoking its extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code
to quash the proceedings.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A FIR
in Crime No.444 of 2018 was registered at the Edathala Police
Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OFT HE F.I.R IN CRIME NO,444/2018
OF EDATHALA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.S IN CRIME NO.444/2018
OF EDATHALA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND