SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mohammadali vs State Of Kerala on 16 November, 2018

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. 7162 of 2018

AGAINST THE ORDER IN LP 116/2013 of J.M.F.C.,PARAPPANANGADI

CRIME NO. 373/2009 OF TANUR POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

MOHAMMADALI, AGED 54 YEARS,
S/O.UNNIKOYA, KUZHIKATTIL VEEDU,
PUTHUKODE POST, RAMANATTUKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
TANUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN 676302.

2 FATHIMA,
D/O.KUNHIMMU, AGED 44 YEARS, CHERUPURAKKAL HOUSE,
AAL BAZAR, KORMAN KADAPPURAM, POST TANUR,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676302.

3 SAFIYA,
D/O.KUNHIMMU, AGED 43 YEARS, CHERUPURAKKAL HOUSE,
AAL BAZAR, KORMAN KADAPPURAM, POST TANUR,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676302.

BY ADV. SRI.J.RAMKUMAR

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. 7162 of 2018 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 petitioner.

2. The 2nd respondent is the wife of the petitioner. The

marriage between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent was

solemnized about 26 years back. As the 2 nd respondent is a deaf

and dumb, she is represented by her younger sister, who is the 3 rd

respondent herein. When disputes arose between the parties, a

complaint was lodged before the learned Magistrate by the 3 rd

respondent alleging offence punishable under Section 406 and 498A

r/w. Section 34 of the IPC. The family members of the petitioner

were also arrayed as accused. In the course of investigation, they

were removed from the array of parties. Specific allegation is that

the petitioner had subjected the de facto complainant to culpable

matrimonial cruelty. After completion of investigation, final report

was laid before the court below. As the petitioner was not in station,

the case was removed to the register of Long Pending cases and is

now pending as L.P. No.116 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Parappanangadi.
Crl.MC.No. 7162 of 2018 3

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that during pendency of the criminal proceedings, the

parties have settled the entire disputes. The petitioner as well as the

2nd respondent are the parents of two children and their future

prospects were also considered while arriving at the settlement. The

learned counsel has referred to Annexure-A4 agreement entered

into between the parties, by which the entire terms were reduced in

writing. He would also refer to Annexures-A5 and A6 affidavits sworn

to by the respondents 2 and 3 to substantiate his contention.

4. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3

would support the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner. It is submitted that the respondents have no further

grievance and they have no objection in terminating the criminal

proceedings against the petitioner.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, has

submitted that the statement of the 3rd respondent has been

recorded and she has stated in unequivocal terms that the

settlement arrived at is genuine.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced.
Crl.MC.No. 7162 of 2018 4

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.

8. 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. 7162 of 2018 5

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A3

final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the

petitioner now pending as L.P.No. 116/2013 on the file of the Judicial

Magistrate of First Class, Parappanangadi are quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
IAP
Crl.MC.No. 7162 of 2018 6

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND NUMBERED AS CMP
NO.2329/2009 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT, PARAPPANANGADI.

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT DATED 16.9.2009 IN CRIME
NO.373/2009 OF TANUR POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.373/2009 OF TANUR POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 11.9.2018
EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR
OF THE PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE A5 AFFIDAVIT DATED 11.9.2018 EXECUTED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE A6 AFFIDAVIT DATED 11.9.2018 EXECUTED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:

NIL

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