IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY0 2019 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 8906 of 2018
CC 218/2016 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, ATTINGAL
CRIME NO. 745/2014 OF Mangalapuram Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:
1 SAFEER, AGED 37 YEARS,
S/O. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, PANAYIL VEEDU, PARAMBILPALAM,
PALLIPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
2 SUNITHA @ SAFIDA, AGED 33 YEARS,
W/O. ANWAR, KUNNUPURATHU VEEDU, KUNNUMPURAM DESOM,
ANDOORKONAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
3 ANWAR, AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU,KUNNUPURATHU VEEDU, KUNNUMPURAM DESOM,
ANDOORKONAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
4 ISUMUDDDIN, AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O. SAINUDEEN,PANAYIL VEEDU, PARAMBIL PALAM, PALLIPURAM
VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA)
RESPONDENTS/STATE, DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,,ERNAKULAM-682031.
2 SABITHA, AGED 25 YEARS,
D/O. THAHA, SABITHA MANZIL, KODIMANAKKADU, TC. 1/873,
STATION KADAVU, KAZHAKOOTTAM P.O, ATTIPRA VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695001.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.CHANDRA BABU
R1 BY SRI. B JAYASURYA, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2019, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 8906 of 2018 2
ORDER
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.218 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First
Class-II, Attingal. The 1st petitioner is her husband and the
petitioners 2 to 4 are his near relatives. They are being
proceeded against for having committed offences punishable
under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act.
3. This 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 submits 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. 8906 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 proceedings.
Crl.MC.No. 8906 of 2018 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.218 of 2016 on the
file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Attingal are
quashed.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,.
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
DSV/26.2.19
Crl.MC.No. 8906 of 2018 5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN (CC 218/16
PENDING BEFORE THE JFCM-II,ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
