IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 1299 of 2019
CRIME NO. 390/2018 OF THOTTILPALAM POLICE STATION, Kozhikode
PETITIONER/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
NISHA K.P., AGED 29 YEARS,
D/O.ASHOKAN, KINARULLAPARAMBATH HOUSE,
NEDUMANNUR.P.O., KAKKATTIL VIA, KAYAKKODY,
KUNNUMMAL, THOTTILPALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673502.
BY ADV. SRI.E.NARAYANAN
RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2 STATE:
1 SURESH K.S.,
S/O.SANKARAN, AGED 39, KALARIKKANDY HOUSE,
MOYILOTHARA POST, MARUTHONKARA, KUNNUMMAL,
THOTTILPALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673507.
2 SANKARAN,
S/O.CHOYI, KALARIKKANDY HOUSE, MOYILOTHARA POST,
MARUTHONKARA, KUNNUMMAL, THOTTILPALAM, KOZHIKODE,
PIN-673507.
3 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA-31.
R1 R2 BY ADV. SMT.S.SMITHA (PARAKKAL)
R3 SRI T R RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1299 of 2019 2
ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioner is the de facto complainant in Crime
No.390 of 2018 of the Thottilpalam Police Station. The
respondents 1 and 2 are the husband and father-in-law of the
petitioner. The aforesaid crime was registered at the instance of
the petitioner against the respondents 1 and 2 alleging offence
punishable under Sections 498A and 406 read with Section 34 of
the IPC.
3. This petition is filed with a prayer to quash the
proceedings on the ground of settlement of all disputes. The
petitioner has filed an affidavit stating that she is not desirous of
prosecuting her husband and the father-in-law.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has obtained instructions.
He submitted that the statement of the petitioner has been
recorded and the State has no objection in terminating the
proceedings as it involves no public interest.
5. I have considered the submissions advanced.
Crl.MC.No. 1299 of 2019 3
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 proceedings.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed.
Annexure-A1 FIR in Crime No.390 of 2018 of the Thottilpalam
Crl.MC.No. 1299 of 2019 4
Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto against
respondent Nos.1 and 2 are quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
DSV/ //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 1299 of 2019 5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR FILED BY THE
THOTTILPALAM POLICE BEFORE THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, NADAPURAM.
ANNEXURE A2 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE A3 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A4 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
