IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 2ND MAGHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 253 of 2019
CRIME NO. 1435/2018 OF North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 2:
1 SHAHANSHA, AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O. MOOSA, VELINPARAMBIL HOUSE,
MANNAM, NORTH PARAMVUR,
2 SAJITHA MOOSA, AGED 50 YEARS,
W/O. MOOSA, VELINPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANNAM,
NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM (DIST)
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682 031.
2 FATHIMA, W/O. MUHAMMEDALI, THANIYIL HOUSE,
THOTTAKKATTUKARA, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM (DIST) 683101.
R2 BY ADV. SMT.BINU K.B.
R1 BY SRI. T. R. RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 253 of 2019 2
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 Crime
No.1435 of 2018 of the North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam
District. The petitioners herein are the husband and mother-in-
law of the 2nd respondent and they are proceeded against for
having committed offences punishable under Section 498A r/w.
Section 34 of the IPC.
3. The instant petition is initiated 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
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has obtained instructions.
He submitted that the statement of the 2nd 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.No. 253 of 2019 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.
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 proceedings.
Crl.MC.No. 253 of 2019 4
In the result, this petition will stand allowed.
Annexure-A first information report in Crime No.1435 of 2018 of
the North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam District and all
proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
Crl.MC.No. 253 of 2019 5
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 1435 OF
2018 OF NORTH PARAVUR POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE B AFFIDAVIT DTD. 21-06-2014 SWORN BY 2ND