SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Anwarali vs State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 8021 of 2018

CRIME NO. 344/2017 OF KOTTAKKAL POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 ANWARALI, AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O. MARAKKAR, RESIDING AT MANGADAN HOUSE,
PULIKKOD, KOTTAKKAL,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT – 676 503

2 KHADEEJA, AGED 55 YEARS,
W/O. MARAKKAR, RESIDING AT MANGADAN HOUSE,
PULIKKOD, KOTTAKKAL,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT – 676 503

3 MARAKKAR, AGED 60 YEARS,
MANGADAN HOUSE, PULIKKOD, KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT – 676 503

4 ANSARALI, AGED 25 YEARS,
S/O. MARAKKAR, MANGADAN HOUSE, PULIKKOD, KOTTAKKAL,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT – 676 503

BY ADVS.
SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ
SRI.P.T.SHEEJISH

RESPONDENT/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

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

2 NASEEMA, AGED 27 YEARS,
D/O. RAYINKUTTY, RESIDING AT KUNNAKKADAL HOUSE,
RANDATHANI, KOTTAKKAL, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN – 682 032

BY ADV. SRI.AJOY VENU

OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PP

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.A. No.8021/18 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 Crime

No.344 of 2017 registered at the Kottakkal Police Station for offence

under Sections 406 498A r/w. Section 34 of the IPC. The

petitioners herein are the husband and his near relatives.

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 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.

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
Crl.M.A. No.8021/18 3

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 FIR

in Crime No.344 of 2017 of the Kottakkal Police Station and all

proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
PS
//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
Crl.M.A. No.8021/18 4

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE P1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION

REPORT IN CRIME NO. 344 OF 2017 OF KOTTAKKAL
POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 406, 498A R/W 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL
CODE.

ANNEXURE P2 NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
13.08.2018.

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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