IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 7632 of 2018
CC 980/2013 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALAPPUZHA
CRIME NO. 913/2012 OF MANNANCHERRY POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA
1 NASAR M.,
AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMUDKUNJU, DHARUL JAMEEL, KUTTICHIRA P.O,
W/O.MUHAMUDKUNJU, DHARUL JAMEEL, KUTTICHIRA P.O,
BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JEEVESH
RESPONDENTS/STATE INJURED PERSON:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
AGED 34 YEARS,
W/O.NASAR, KULAKADU, MANNANCHERY P.O, ALAPUZHA
R1 BY SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJATH ALI
R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.S.DHEERAJ
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7632 of 2018 2
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.980 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I,
Alappuzha. The petitioners herein are the husband and in-laws of
the 2nd respondent and they are being proceeded against for having
committed offence punishable under Section 498A r/w. Section 34 of
3. The instant petition 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 2 nd respondent has been
recorded and the State has no objection in terminating the
proceedings as it involves no public interest.
Crl.MC.No. 7632 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 extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the
Crl.MC.No. 7632 of 2018 4
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.980 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial First
Class Magistrate-I, Alappuzha are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 7632 of 2018 5
ANNEXURE-A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.913 OF
2012 OF MANNANCHERY POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE-A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN
C.C.980/2013 PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT 1.
ANNEXURE-A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.