SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sethu Lawrence vs The State Of Kerala on 4 February, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 15TH MAGHA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 8587 of 2018

AGAINST THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.80/2014 ON THE FILES OF THE
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, VARKALA

CRIME NO.695/2013 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 5:

1 SETHU LAWRENCE, AGED 37 YEARS,
S/O. LAWRENCE, SSA VILLA, FISHERMEN COLONY,
THANNI, KOLLAM-691 303

2 LINNA, C/O. TITUS,
FISHERMEN COLONY, TANNI, KOLLAM-691 303

3 STALIN, S/O. LAWRENCE,
FISHERMEN COLONY, THANNI, KOLLAM-691 303

4 ANITHA, D/O. LAWRENCE,
FISHERMEN COLONY, THANNI, KOLLAM-691 303

5 JOHNSON, C/O. ANITHA,
FISHERMEN COLONY, THANNI, KOLLAM-691 303

BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJESH(PULLIKADA)

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 VIMALA, D/O. ANTONY,
VADATHAZHI, SHALOM BHAVAN,
KADAKKAVOOR DESOM, KADAKKAVOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 309

BY ADV. SRI.ANAND B. MENON
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. T. R. RENJITH

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC:8587/2018 2

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the proceedings

pending against the petitioners.

2. The 1st petitioner herein is the husband of the 2 nd

respondent and petitioners 2 to 5 are his parents and near

relatives. They are being proceeded against for having committed

offence punishable under Section 498A r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

The prosecution allegation is that the petitioners have subjected

the 2nd respondent to matrimonial cruelty.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

submitted that at the instance of well wishers and family

members, the parties have decided to put an end to their discord.

It is urged that the dispute is purely private in nature.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent,

invited the attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by her and

asserts that the disputes inter se have been settled and the

continuance of criminal proceedings will only result in gross
CRL.MC:8587/2018 3

inconvenience and hardship. It is submitted that the 2 nd

respondent has no objection in allowing the prayer sought for.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions

has submitted that the statement of the 2 nd respondent has been

recorded and she has stated in unequivocal terms that the

settlement arrived at is genuine.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced and have

perused the materials on record.

7. 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
CRL.MC:8587/2018 4

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.

8. 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-A2

final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the

petitioners in C.C. No.80 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial First

Class Magistrate Court-I, Varkala are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE

//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE

krj
CRL.MC:8587/2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF F.I.R NO. 695/13 OF
KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED IN
CRIME NO. 695/2013 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE
STATION.

ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF
AGREEMENT DATED 10.10.2018

ANNEXURE A4 AFFIDAVIT.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation