IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 638 of 2019
CC 142/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PARAVOOR
CRIME NO. 465/2017 OF Paravoor Police Station, Kollam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
AMBILIMON, AGED 44 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMMED SALI, NEERAZHIYIL VEEDU,
KOTTAPPURAM VILLAGE, THEKKUMBHAGAM CHERRY,
PARAVOOR, KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.SANTHOSH (VARKALA)
SRI.C.R.VIJAYAKUMARAN PILLAI
SMT.S.SANTHY (S-3446)
RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2 SOBHIDA, AGED 34 YEARS,
D/O.AMEERUDHEEN, SOUTH PUTHEN VEEDU,
KOTTAPPURAM VILLAGE, THEKKUMBHAGAM CHERRY,
PARAVOOR, KOLLAM, PIN- 691301.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.CHANDRA BABU
R1 BY SRI. B. JAYASURYA, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 638 of 2019 2
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant in
C.C.No.142 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First
Class, Paravoor. The petitioner herein is the husband of the 2 nd
respondent and he is being proceeded against for having
committed offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and
498A 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 petitioner.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has obtained instructions.
He submitted that the statement of the 2nd 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.
Crl.MC.No. 638 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. 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
Crl.MC.No. 638 of 2019 4
against the petitioner now pending as C.C.No.142 of 2018 on the
file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Paravoor are quashed.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
DSV/26.2.19
Crl.MC.No. 638 of 2019 5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
PARAVOOR POLICE STATION CRIME NO.465/2017
ON THE FILES OF THE HON’BLE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVOOR, WHICH IS
PENDING AS C.C.NO.142/2018.
ANNEXURE B THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN PARAVOOR
POLICE STATION CRIME NO.465/2017.
ANNEXURE C THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 10.12.2018 EXECUTED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JDUGE
