SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mubarak V.A. vs State Of Kerala on 10 January, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 20TH POUSHA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 7804 of 2018
IN CC NO.734/2017 ON THE FILES OF THE J.M.F.C.-II, KASARAGOD
CRIME NO. 196/2016 OF Manjeswar Police Station , Kasargod

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 MUBARAK V.A., AGED 36 YEARS, A1
S/O ABOOBACKER V.M., R/AT BADRAVATHY COTTAGE,
MANJESWAR UDAYAMANGALAM ROAD, UDYAWAR VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

2 ATHIKKA V.A., AGED 35 YEARS, A3
W/O. MOOSA, R/AT BISHAT MANZIL, MUNNIL NAGAR,
MUTTOM, SHIRIYA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

3 ABDUL LATHEEF V.A., AGED 42 YEARS, A4
R/AT BADRAVATHY COTTAGE, MANJESWAR UDAYAMANGALAM
ROAD, UDYAWAR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON
SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI

RESPONDENT/S:

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

2 FATHIMATH ASHBIYA,
D/O. ABDUL AZEEZ, R/AT MASHA ALLAH HOUSE,
MANNAKUZHI, UPPALA, MANJESHWAR TALUK,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.LOHITHAKSHAN CHATHADI KANNOTH
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RENJITH

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7804 of 2018

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 C.C.No.

734 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II,

Kasaragod. The 1st petitioner herein is the husband of the 2 nd

respondent. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners are his near relatives. They

are being proceeded against for having committed offence

punishable under Sections 498A and 324 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The instant proceeding 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. 7804 of 2018

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 extra ordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash

the proceedings.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A1
Crl.MC.No. 7804 of 2018

4

final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the

petitioners now pending as C.C.No.734 of 2017 on the file of the

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kasargod are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE

//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE

avs
Crl.MC.No. 7804 of 2018

5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT-A1 THE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT.

EXHIBIT-A2 THE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT.

RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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