IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 30TH MAGHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 1133 of 2019
CC 2052/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, ALAPPUZHA
CRIME NO. 1013/2018 OF Alappuzha South Police Station, Alappuzha
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3:
1 RAOOF P.A.,
AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL AZEEZ, PATHILCHIRA VEEDU KUTHIRAPANTHY WARD,
AGED 39 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL AZEEZ, RAJA PURAYIDAM, ZACHARIA WARD, ALAPPUZHA.
3 MARIYATH BEEVI,
AGED 59 YEARS,
W/O ABDUL AZEEZ, PATHILCHIRA VEEDU KUTHIRAPANTHY WARD,
AGED 36 YEARS,
D/O. ABDUL AZEEZ, PATHILCHIRA VEEDU, KUTHIRAPANTHY WARD,
BY ADV. SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI
RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT STATE:
1 ROSHNA AZEEZ, AGED 22 YEARS,
W/O. RAOOF, HAJI MANZIL, VELLAKINAR WARD, ALAPPUZHA-688 014.
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682031. (REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA
SOUTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT).
R1 BY ADV. SRI.E.RAFEEK
R2 BY SRI.T. R. RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2019, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1133 of 2019 2
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (“the Code” for brevity).
2. The 1st respondent is the de facto complainant in
C.C.No.2052 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First
Class-I, Alappuzha. The 1st respondent is the wife of the 1 st
petitioner. The petitioners 2 to 4 are the near relatives of the 1 st
petitioner. They are being proceeded against for having committed
offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406 and 420 r/w.
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 1st
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 1 st respondent has been
recorded and the State has no objection in terminating the
proceedings as it involves no public interest.
Crl.MC.No. 1133 of 2019 3
5. I have considered the submissions advanced and have
perused the materials on record.
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.
Crl.MC.No. 1133 of 2019 4
In the result, this petition will stand allowed.
Annexure-A1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto
against the petitioners now pending as C.C.No.2052 of 2018 on
the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Alappuzha are
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
Crl.MC.No. 1133 of 2019 5
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY THE FINAL REPORT IN
C.C.NO.2052/2018 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT I, ALAPPUZHA.
ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT DATED 5.2.2019 SWORN TO BY THE