SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Muhammed Kabeer vs State Of Kerala on 22 November, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 7326 of 2018

CC NO.876/2013 ON THE FILES OF THE J.M.F.C.-I, ATTINGAL

CRIME NO.952/2012 OF ATTINGAL POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1:

MUHAMMED KABEER,
AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL VAHID, FATHIMA MANZIL,
NEAR ALAMCODE VHSS, MAVARKKAL DESOM,
ALAMCODE VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 102.

BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PIN – 682 031.

2 BINI, AGED 34 YEARS,
D/O LAILA BEEVI, BEENA MANZIL, GURUNAGAPPAN KAVU,
KEEZHATTINGAL DESOM, ALAMCODE P.O,
CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 304.

R1 BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7326 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 2 nd respondent was

solemnized on 17.01.2005. In the course of their connubial

relationship, serious disputes cropped up. The 2nd respondent

specifically alleges that the petitioner is guilty of culpable matrimonial

cruelty. This finally led to the institution of criminal proceedings at the

instance of the 2nd 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.876 of 2013 on the files of the

Judicial Magistrate of First Class – I, Attingal. In the aforesaid case, the

petitioner is accused of having committed offence punishable under

Sections 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted

that at the instance of well wishers and family members, the parties

have decided to put an end to their discord and have decided to go

separate ways. It is urged that the dispute is purely private in nature.
Crl.MC.No. 7326 of 2018 3

The learned counsel for the 2nd 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 2nd 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 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
Crl.MC.No. 7326 of 2018 4

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

extraordinary 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 petitioner

in C.C.No.876 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate

Court -I, Attingal are quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

JUDGE
IAP
Crl.MC.No. 7326 of 2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R.IN CRIME
NO.952/2012 OF ATTINGAL POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
C.C.NO.876/2013 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1,ATTINGAL
WHICH AROSE FROM CRIME NO.952/2012 OF
ATTINGAL POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE OF 2ND
PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED ISSUED BY SUB
REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED
23.3.2018

ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF COMPROMISE ENTERED BETWEEN 1ST
PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT IN
M.C.NO.431/2018 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY
COURT,ATTINGAL DATED 25.10.2018.

ANNEXURE A5 ORIGINAL OF NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2018.

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