SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jowhar Jowhari vs State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 30TH MAGHA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 669 of 2019

CRIME NO. 1752/2017 OF KOVALAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:

1 JOWHAR JOWHARI, AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O AMANULLAKHAN, THAZHEVETTUVILAKOM, HARBOR ROAD,
VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2 FATHIMUTHU SUHARA, AGED 65 YEARS,
W/O AMANULLAKHAN, THAZHEVETTUVILAKOM, HARBOR ROAD,
VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3 ASEENA,
AGED 23 YEARS,
D/O FATHIMUTHU SUHARA, THAZHEVETTUVILAKOM, HARBOR ROAD,
VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

4 SAINABA, AGED 33 YEARS,
D/O FATHIMUTHU SUHARA, THAZHEVETTUVILAKOM,
HARBOR ROAD, VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 SOLIHA BEEVI, AGED 21 YEARS,
D/O MAJIDA, SOLIHA MANZIL, CHARUVILA HOUSE,
IYTHIYOOR, KARAKKATTUVILA, BALARAMAPURAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695507.

R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.K.RAJESH

R1 BY SRI.T.R. RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2019, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 669 of 2019 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.1752 of 2017 of the Kovalam Police Station. The 1 st petitioner

is the husband of the 2nd respondent and petitioners 2 to 4 are his

near relatives. They are being proceeded against for having

committed offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC.

3. This 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 2nd respondent has been

recorded and the State has no objection in terminating the

proceedings as it involves no public interest.
Crl.MC.No. 669 of 2019 3

5. I have considered the submissions advanced and have

perused the materials on record.

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. 669 of 2019 4

In the result, this petition will stand allowed.

Annexure-A first information report in Crime No.1752 of 2017 of

the Kovalam Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto

against the petitioners are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE

DSV/20.2.19
Crl.MC.No. 669 of 2019 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.1752/2017 OF KOVALAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE B AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE
FACTO COMPLAINANT.

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