SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jose Vinu vs Monisha on 25 February, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 1134 of 2019

CC 866/2016 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOCHI

CRIME NO. 1655/2014 OF Palluruthy Police Station, Ernakulam

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 JOSE VINU, AGED 33 YEARS,
S/O ALBERT, KUDUVASSERY HOUSE, PERUMPADAPPU KARA,
PALLURUTHY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 006.

2 JOSEPHINE, AGED 57 YEARS,
W/O. ALBERT, KUDUVASSERY HOUSE, PERUMPADAPPU KARA,
PALLURUTHY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 006.

BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN

RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT COMPLAINANT:

1 MONISHA, AGED 29 YEARS,
D/O. AUGUSTINE, KUTTATHIPARAMBU HOUSE, NORTH
THAMARAPPARAMBU, FORT KOCHI VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 001.

2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR

R2 SRI.B. JAYASURYA, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1134 of 2019 2

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

2. The 1st respondent is the de facto complainant in

C.C.No.866 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First

Class-II, Kochi. The 1st petitioner is her husband and the 2nd

petitioner is his mother. They are being proceeded against for

having committed offence punishable under Section 498A r/w.

Section 34 of the IPC.

3. This petition is filed with a prayer to quash the

proceedings on the ground of settlement of all disputes. The 1st

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 1st

respondent has been recorded and the State has no objection in

terminating the proceedings as it involves no public interest.
Crl.MC.No. 1134 of 2019 3

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 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.
Crl.MC.No. 1134 of 2019 4

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.866 of 2016 on the

file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Kochi are quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,

JUDGE

//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE

DSV/26.2.19
Crl.MC.No. 1134 of 2019 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC

NO.866/2016 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOCHI ARISING
OUT OF CRIME NO.1655/2014 OF PALLURUTHY
POLICE STATION DATED 11.11.2014.

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE IST
RESPONDENT DATED 30.11.2018.

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 © 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