IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 8TH MAGHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 8549 of 2018
IN CC NO.529/2017 of TEMPORARY JUDL. FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, NJARAKKAL
CRIME NO.437/2016 OF NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1,2 3:
1 AMAL K.WILFRED, AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O.WILFRED, KANAKKASSERY HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM.
2 ALAN K.WILFRED, AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O.WILFRED, KANAKKASSERY HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM.
3 KUNJAMMA WILFRED, AGED 62 YEARS,
W/O.WILFRED, KANAKKASSERY HOUSE,
PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.
BALU TOM CHERUVALLY
SRI.K.R.JITHIN
RESPONDENTS/STATE COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2 PRINCY, AGED 31 YEARS, W/O.AMAL K.WILFRED,
KANAKKASSERY HOUSE, PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, NJARAKKAL,
ERNAKULAM – 682 505.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. T. R. RENJITH PP.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC:8549/18 2
ORDER
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. The 2nd respondent is the wife of the 1st petitioner. The
petitioners 2 and 3 are his near relatives. According to the
prosecution, the petitioners subjected the 2 nd respondent to ill-
treatment and harassment demanding dowry. At the instance of
the 2nd respondent, Crime was registered and after investigation,
final report was laid before the jurisdictional court incorporating
offence under Sections 406, 498A and 506 r/w. Section 34 of the
IPC. The case is now pending as C.C. No.529 of 2017 on the files
of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Njarakkal.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submitted that at the instance of well wishers and family
members, the entire disputes have been settled. It is urged that
the dispute is purely private in nature.
4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent invited the
attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by her and asserts that
CRL.MC:8549/18 3
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 2 nd respondent has no objection
in allowing the prayer sought for.
5. 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.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced and have
perused the materials on record.
7. 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
CRL.MC:8549/18 4
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.
8. 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 report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the
petitioners now pending as C.C. No.529 of 2017 on the files of the
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Njarakkal are quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
krj
CRL.MC:8549/18 5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN
C.C.529/2017 ON THE FILES OF THE COURT OF
THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
NJARAKKAL.
ANNEXURE B THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.