SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jineesh P.J. vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 2ND MAGHA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 8793 of 2018

CC NO.353/2018 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,
ERNAKULAM

CRIME NO.1481/2016 OF MULAVUKADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

JINEESH P.J., AGED 24 YEARS,
S/O JEEVARAJAN, PALLTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
PONJIKARA, MULAVUKADU, ERNAKULAM.

BY ADV. SRI.K.B.SAJAN

RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

2 KRIPA, AGED 21 YEARS,
PALLTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PONJIKARA,
MULAVUKADU, ERNAKULAM-682504.

R2 BY ADV. P.SREEKUMAR

R1 BY SRI. T. R. RENJITH PP.

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 8793 of 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.353 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First

Class-I, Ernakulam. The petitioner is the husband of the 2 nd

respondent and he is proceeded against for having committed

offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC.

3. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner

subjected the 2nd respondent to matrimonial cruelty demanding

dowry.

4. 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.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has obtained

instructions. He submitted that the statement of the 2 nd
Crl.MC.No. 8793 of 2018 3

respondent has been recorded and the State has no objection in

terminating the proceedings as it involves no public interest.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced and have

gone through the materials on record.

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. Having

considered all the relevant circumstances, I am of the considered
Crl.MC.No. 8793 of 2018 4

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-2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto

against the petitioner now pending as C.C.No.353 of 2018 on the

file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Ernakulam are

quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,

JUDGE
DSV/-

Crl.MC.No. 8793 of 2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R NO. 1481/2016 DATED
05-12-2016 OF MULAVUKADU POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED
22-03-2017 OF MULAVUKADU POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE 3 AFFIDAVIT OF CW1 IN C.C NO 353/2018 OF
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE I, COURT,
ERNAKULAM.

RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE

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