IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 23RD KARTHIKA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 6874 of 2018
CC 943/2017 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,
CRIME NO. 687/2016 OF ARIYANCODE POLICE STATION,
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 AND 2:
AGED 29 YEARS,
S/O. SOMAN, SAROVARAM, SASTHAMKONAM, KEEZHAROOR,
NEYYATTINKARA, ARIYANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL,
2 SAROJINI AMMA,
SAROVARAM, SASTHAMKONAM, KEEZHAROOR, NEYYATTINKARA,
ARIYANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL, KERALA, INDIA.
BY ADV. SRI.D.AJITHKUMAR
RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.
2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
ARIYANCODE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL,
3 RESHMI H.L.,
AGED 25, D/O. LATHAKUMARI, REKSHMI NILAYAM,
NEPPEKONAM, OORUTTAMBALAM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695
SRI C K PRASAD, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1 R1
ADV.T.MANASY FOR R3
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. 6874 of 2018 2
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 3rd respondent is the wife of the 1st petitioner. The 2nd
petitioner is the mother of the 1st petitioner. The marriage between
the 1st petitioner and the 3rd respondent was solemnized on
28.10.2015. In the course of their connubial relationship, serious
disputes cropped up. The 3rd 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 3 rd
respondent. Annexure-A FIR was registered and after investigation,
Annexure-B final report was laid before the learned Magistrate and
the case is now pending as C.C.No.943 of 2017 on the file of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara. 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. 6874 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 3 rd respondent, invited the
attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by 3 rd 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 3 rd 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 3 rd 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 Another [(2013) 4 SCC 58], it was observed that
Crl.MC.No. 6874 of 2018 4
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
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
8. In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-B
final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the
petitioners now pending as C.C.No.943 of 2017 on the file of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Neyyattinkara are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
//True Copy// P.A.To Judge
Crl.MC.No. 6874 of 2018 5
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.
0687/2016 OF ARIYANCODE POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. NO.
943 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL
FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,
ANNEXURE C AFFIDAVIT OF THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT.