IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY ,THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 7163 of 2018
CC 1265/2016 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR
CRIME NO. 1674/2016 OF CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION , KOLLAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 4:
1 MAHESH
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O. MANI DAS, NANDANAM, ADAYAMON P.O., KILIMANOOR,
CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT – 695 614.
2 VALSALA,
AGED 60 YEARS
W/O MANI DAS,NANDANAM,CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK,
ADAYAMON P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT – 695 614.
3 MANI DASD @ MANI,
AGED 74 YEARS
S/O GANGADHARAN,NANDANAM,ADAYAMON
P.O.KILIMANOOR,CHIRAYINKEEZHU
TALUK,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT – 695 614.
4 DIVYA,
AGED 34 YEARS
D/O MANI DAS,NANDANAM,NANDANAM,
ADAYAMON P.O.,KILIMANOOR,CHIRAYINKEEZHU
TALUK,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT – 695 614.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SIJU
SMT.S.SEETHA
Crl.MC.No. 7163 of 2018 2
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNOOR
POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.
2 ANJALI CHANDRAN
AGED 29 YEARS
W/O. BALACHANDRAN,RESIDING AT KIZHAKKEKARA PUTHEN
VEEDU,NEDUMPANA P.O.NEDUMPANA VILLAGE,KOLLAM
DISTRICT AND NOW RESIDING AT PAVITHRAM,
NEAR SISU VIHAR SCHOOL,KILIMANOOR P.O.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 601.
BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR
SRI C K PRASAD PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7163 of 2018 3
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 wife of the 1st petitioner.
Petitioners 2 to 4 are his near relatives. The marriage between them
was solemnized on 21.01.2014. In the course of their connubial
relationship, serious disputes cropped up. The 2 nd 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 2 nd 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.1265 of
2016 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class
(Temporary), Paravoor, Kollam. They are accused of having
committed offence punishable under Sections 325 and 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,
Crl.MC.No. 7163 of 2018 4
the parties have decided to put an end to their discord and have
decided to live in peace. It is urged that the dispute is purely private
in nature. The learned counsel appearing for the 2 nd 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 2 nd respondent
has no objection in allowing the prayer sought for.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions
has submitted that the statement of the 2nd respondent has been
recorded and she has stated in unequivocal terms that the
settlement arrived at is genuine.
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
Crl.MC.No. 7163 of 2018 5
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.
7. 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-
A2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the
petitioners now pending as C.C.No.1265 of 2016 on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate of First Class(Temporary), Paravoor, Kollam are
quashed.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
IAP
Crl.MC.No. 7163 of 2018 6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO 1674/2016 OF
CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION ALONG WITH THE
COMPLAINT IN CMP NO 957/2016
ANNEXURE A2 THE FINAL REPORT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
JFCM (TEMPORARY) PARAVOOR IN CRIME NO
1674/2016 OF CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE 3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
REGARDING THE COMPROMISE DATED 23.10.2018
RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:
NIL