SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shafiq Palakkodan vs State Of Kerala on 14 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 8105 of 2018

IN CC NO.149/2017 ON THE FILES OF J.M.F.C., PAYYANNUR

CRIME NO. 553/2016 OF Payyannur Police Station, Kannur

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1, 2, 3, 4:

1 SHAFIQ PALAKKODAN, AGED 38 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMED, PALAKKODAN HOUSE, MATTOOL NORTH,
KANNUR DISTRICT.

2 SAREENA PALAKKODAN, AGED 42 YEARS
D/O.MUHAMMED, PALAKKODAN HOUSE, MATTOOL NORTH,
KANNUR DISTRICT.

3 JABBAR, AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O.MAMMU, KAKKADVALAPPIL HOUSE, MATTOOL NORTH,
KANNUR DISTRICT.

4 SHABEER PALAKKODAN, AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMMED, PALAKKODAN HOUSE, MATTOOL NORTH,
KANNUR DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.TITUS MANI

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.

2 FAYIZA M.K.,
AGED 21 YEARS
D/O.MOIDEEN, MAVINTEKEEZHIL HOUSE,
MATTOOL P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.ABHILASH S.FRANCIS

OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PP

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2018, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC:8105/18 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.149 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First

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

respondent and the petitioners 2 to 4 are the relatives of the 1 st

petitioner. They are being proceeded against for having committed

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

3. The instant 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 submitted 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.

5. I have considered the submissions advanced.

Crl.MC:8105/18 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 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the
Crl.MC:8105/18 4

petitioners now pending as C.C.No.149 of 2017 on the file of the

Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Payyannur are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
PS
//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
Crl.MC:8105/18 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT DATED
26/12/2016.

ANNEXURE-A2 AN AFFIDAVIT IN ORIGINAL FILED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 23/8/2018.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2020 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