IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY ,THE 09TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 6987 of 2018
CC 2606/2014 of J.M.F.C.,WADAKKANCHERRY
CRIME NO. 283/2013 OF ERUMAPETTY POLICE STATION , THRISSUR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 JAISON
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O. LATE OUSEPH, ALLOOR HOUSE, ERUMAPETTY P.O.,
ERUMAPETTY DESOM, KARIYANNOOR VILLAGE,
THALAPPALLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
2 MARY,
AGED 63 YEARS
W/O. LATE OUSEPH, ALLOOR HOUSE, ERUMAPETTY P.O.,
ERUMAPETTY DESOM, KARIYANNOOR VILLAGE,
THALAPPALLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.N.ABHILASH
SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
ERUMAPETTY POLICE STATION,
THRISSUR – 680 584.
3 LINTU
AGED 32 YEARS,D/O. VELLARA ANTONY,
KAROOR DESOM, THANGALLOOR VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 020.
BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
SRI. T R RENJITH-PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 6987 of 2018 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 3rd respondent is the wife of the 1st petitioner. The
marriage between them was solemnized on 04.01.2009. In the course
of their connubial relationship, serious disputes cropped up. The 3 rd
respondent specifically alleges that the petitioners are guilty of
culpable matrimonial cruelty. This finally led to the institution of
criminal proceedings at the instance of the 3 rd respondent. FIR was
registered and after investigation, final report was laid before the
learned Magistrate and the case is now pending as C.C.No.2606 of
2014 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Wadakkanchery, Thrissur. In the aforesaid case, the petitioners are
accused of having committed offence punishable under Sections 406,
420 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted
that at the instance of well wishers and family members, the parties
have decided to put an end to their discord and to live in peace. It is
urged that the dispute is purely private in nature.
Crl.MC.No. 6987 of 2018 3
4. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, invited the
attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by her and asserts that 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 3rd 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 3rd 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.
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
Crl.MC.No. 6987 of 2018 4
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-A1 final
report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners
now pending as C.C.No.2606/2014 on the file of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court, Wadakkanchery, Thrissur are quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
IAP
Crl.MC.No. 6987 of 2018 5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
26.8.2013 IN CC.NO,2606/2014 ON THE FILES
OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT,VADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
ANNEXURE A2 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3D RESPONDENT
DATED 14.8.2018.
RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS
NIL