SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Aneesh vs State Of Kerala on 10 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 8082 of 2018

IN CC NO.2588/2015 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, MATTANCHERY

CRIME NO. 387/2015 OF Fort Kochi Police Station, Ernakulam

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

ANEESH, AGED 36 YEARS,
S/O.SHAMSU, ABDULLA MANZIL, THURUTHI,
KOCHI VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KOCHI – 1.

BY ADV. SRI.BIMAL PRASAD

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
FORT KOCHI POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

2 ANSIYA, AGED 31 YEARS,
D/O.ANAZ, C.C.IV/247, THOPPIL VEETIL,
PUTHUVASSERY PARAMBU, MATTANCHERRY VILLAGE,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KOCHI – 2.

BY ADV. SRI.P.H.FAIZAL

OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. AMJAD ALI SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC:8082/2018 2

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure (“the Code” for brevity).

2. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant in C.C.

No.2588 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate,

Mattancherry. The petitioner herein is the husband of the 2 nd

respondent and he is being proceeded against for having committed

offence punishable under Section 498A r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The instant 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 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.
Crl.MC:8082/2018 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-A1 final

report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner
Crl.MC:8082/2018 4

now pending as C.C. No.2588 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial First

Class Magistrate, Mattancherry are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
krj

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC:8082/2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
8/6/2015 IN CRIME NO.387/2015 OF FORT KOCHI
POLICE STATION PRESENTLY PENDING AS
C.C.NO.2588/2015 ON THE FILES OF COURT OF
THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE,
MATTANCHERRY.

ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT DATED 22/11/2018 OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT REGARDING SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
BETWEEN HERSELF AND THE PETITIONER.

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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