SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kishore @ Ragesh vs State Of Kerala on 26 November, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 7362 of 2018

CC NO.907/2014 ON THE FILES OF THE J.M.F.C.-I, NEYYATINKARA

CRIME NO.1250/2013 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 3:

1 KISHORE @ RAGESH,
AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.RAJENDRAN,
MULLUVILA VALIYAVILA VEEDU, VENPAKAL,
ATHIYANNOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2 GEETHA DEVI,
AGED 58 YEARS, W/O RAJENDRAN,
MULLUVILA VALIYAVILA VEEDU, VENPAKAL,
ATHIYANNOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 S.S.ATHIRA, AGED 30 YEARS
D/O.SAILAJA, MEKKEKUZHIVILA VEEDU, ERAVIKKONAM,
THIRUPURAM VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 121.

R2 BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN
R1 BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI

THIS CRIMINAL MISC.CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC:7362/18 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 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant in

C.C.No.907 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-

I, Neyyattinkara. The petitioners herein are the husband and mother-

in-law of the 2nd respondent and they are proceeded against for

having committed offence punishable under Sections 498A and 323

r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The instant proceeding is initiated 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 submits 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.

5. I have considered the submissions advanced.
Crl.MC:7362/18 3

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

extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the

proceedings.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A

final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the
Crl.MC:7362/18 4

petitioners now pending as C.C.No.907 of 2014 on the file of the

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
KRJ

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC:7362/18 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO
1250/13 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE B NOTARISED AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 2ND
RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:-NIL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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