SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Akbar vs State Of Kerala on 28 February, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 9TH PHALGUNA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 954 of 2019

IN CC NO.75/2018 OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, PONNANI

CRIME NO. 366/2017 OF PONNANI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 AKBAR, AGED 32 YEARS,
S/O ABOOBACKER, PUZHAKKALATH HOUSE,
POTHANNOOR, EDAPPAL,
MALAPPURAM PIN – 679 576.

2 ABOOBACKER, AGED 60 YEARS,
S/O. IBRAHIM, PUZHAKKALATH HOUSE,
POTHANNOOR, EDAPPAL,
MALAPPURAM PIN – 679 576.

3 NAZEERA, AGED 32 YEARS,
W/O. ABOOBACKER, PUZHAKKALATH HOUSE,
POTHANNOOR, EDAPPAL,
MALAPPURAM PIN – 679 576.

BY ADVS.
SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC
DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY
SRI.JITHIN SAJI ISAAC

RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

2 ANSHADA, AGED 26 YEARS,
W/O. AKBAR, PUZHAKKALATH HOUSE,
POTHANNOOR, EDAPPAL,
MALAPPURAM PIN – 679 576.

BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE

BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.02.2019, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 954 of 2019

2

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant in C.C.No.

75 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ponnani.

The 1st petitioner is the husband of the 2nd respondent and petitioners

2 and 3 are his near relatives. They are being proceeded against for

having committed offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324,

498A, 406, 506(1), 308 354 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

3. This petition is filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings

on the ground of settlement of all disputes. The 2nd respondent has

filed an affidavit stating that she does not wish to continue with the

prosecution proceedings against the petitioners.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has obtained instructions. He

submitted that the statement of the 2 nd respondent has been recorded

and the State has no objection in terminating the proceedings as it

involves no public interest.

5. I have considered the submissions advanced and have

perused the materials on record.

Crl.MC.No. 954 of 2019

3

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 final
Crl.MC.No. 954 of 2019

4

report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners

now pending as C.C.No.75 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court, Ponnani are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,

JUDGE

avs //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 954 of 2019

5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED TO

THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT
PONNANI IN C.C NO.75 OF 2018.

ANNEXURE B COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT.

RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL

avs //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE

Leave a Reply

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

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