IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 7863 of 2018
CC NO.490/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE J.M.F.C., TALIPARAMBA
CRIME NO.577/2011 OF THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR
DIVYA K., AGED 31 YEARS,
D/O THANKARAJAN, AMBAPURAM HOUSE,
BARA P.O. KASARAGOD- 671319.
BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682 031.
2 VINOD M., AGED 40 YEARS,
S/O. NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, MUNDAYATTA HOUSE,
PATTUVAM P.O. KANNUR-670 602.
3 KARTHYAYANI, AGED 62 YEARS,
W/O. NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, MUNDAYATTA HOUSE,
PATTUVAM P.O.KANNUR-670 602.
4 VIDYA, AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O.NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, MUNDAYATTA HOUSE,
PATTUVAM P.O., KANNUR-670 602.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. T. R. RENJITH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7863 of 2018 2
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 respondents.
2. The petitioner herein is the de facto complainant in
C.C.No.490 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate
Court, Taliparamba. The respondents 2 to 4 are the accused in the
said case and they stands indicted for having committed offence under
Section 498A of the IPC.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that the marriage between the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent was
solemnized on 26.6.2010. The relationship became strained
immediately thereafter and on 17.8.2011, she approached the police
and gave information, based on which, Crime No.577 of 2011 was
registered. Final report was laid in the year 2012. Several proceedings
were initiated before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hosdurg and
Crl.MC.No. 7863 of 2018 3
before this Court. While so, at the instance of mediators, the entire
disputes have been settled and the parties have agreed to part ways.
As per the terms of the agreement, both sides have agreed to
withdraw all pending proceedings. The learned counsel refers to
Annexure-3 agreement signed by the petitioner and the 2 nd respondent
in the presence of witnesses. A sum of Rs.4,50,000/- was also handed
over to the petitioner by the 2 nd respondent towards full and final
settlement of her claims. It is submitted that in view of the settlement
arrived at between the parties, this Court will be justified in quashing
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4
submitted that the dispute is purely personal in nature and would not
affect public peace or tranquility.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has
submitted that the statements of the parties have been recorded and
the State has no serious objection in allowing this petition.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced.
Crl.MC.No. 7863 of 2018 4
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 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
Crl.MC.No. 7863 of 2018 5
In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-2 charge
sheet and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the respondents 2
to 4 now pending as C.C.No.490 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Taliparamba are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
IAP //True Copy// P.A.To Judge
Crl.MC.No. 7863 of 2018 6
ANNEXURE-1 COPY OF THE FIR NO 577/11 DATED 17.8.2011
OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED
ANNEXURE -3 COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 15.11.2018