IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 23RD KARTHIKA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 7431 of 2018

CC 1616/2017 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, WADAKKANCHERRY

CRIME NO. 603/2017 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

1 NAVEEN, AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O VISWANATHAN, CHOZHIYATTIL HOUSE, ALATHUR DESAM,
CHITTANJOOR, ANJOOR, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

2 RADHA, AGED 56 YEARS,
W/O VISWANATHAN, CHOZHIYATTIL HOUSE, ALATHUR DESAM,
CHITTANJOOR, ANJOOR, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

3 VISWANATHAN, AGED 63 YEARS,
CHOZHIYATTIL HOUSE, ALATHUR DESAM, CHITTANJOOR,
ANJOOR, VADAKKEKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR
SMT.KRIPA ELIZABETH MATHEWS
SMT.P.F.ROSY

RESPONDENTS/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

2 ANJITHA, AGED 27 YEARS,
D/O BALAKRISHNAN, POOVATHINGAL HOUSE,
MUNDATHIKODE DESOM, PERINGANDOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
(DE FACTO COMPLAINANT)-680623.

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI T R RENJITH
R2 BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP.N.JOSEPH

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.11.2018, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 7431 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 petitioners.

2. The 2nd respondent is the wife of the 1 st petitioner. The

petitioners 2 and 3 are the parents of the 1 st petitioner. The marriage

between the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent was solemnized on

04.04.2015. In the course of their connubial relationship, serious

disputes cropped up. The 2nd respondent specifically alleged 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. Annexure-1 FIR was registered and after investigation,

Annexure-2 final report was laid before the learned Magistrate and the

case is now pending as C.C.No.1616 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial

First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkancherry. In the aforesaid case,

the petitioners are accused of having committed offences punishable

under Sections 406 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, the parties
Crl.MC.No. 7431 of 2018 3

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 2 nd respondent 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
Crl.MC.No. 7431 of 2018 4

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.

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-2 final

report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners

now pending as C.C.No.1616 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First

Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkancherry are quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
DSV/-

//True Copy// P.A.To Judge
Crl.MC.No. 7431 of 2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO. 603/2017

(MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION), BEFORE
THE HONBLE JFCM AT WADAKKANCHERRY,
THRISSUR.

ANNEXURE 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
C.C.NO. 1616/2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, WADAKKANCHERRY, THRISSUR

ANNEXURE 3 STATEMENT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
BEFORE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

ANNEXURE 4 AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE