IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY ,THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 6692 of 2018
CC 302/2013 of J.M.F.C.-II, KOLLAM
CRIME NO. 242/2012 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION , KOLLAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1 SHEMEER
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.SALIM, SHEMEER MANZIL, KULANGARA CHERRY,
CHAVARA, KOLLAM 691583.
2 SALIM H,
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O.HAMSATH KOYA, SHEMEER MANZIL,
KULANGARA CHERRY, CHAVARA, KOLLAM-691583.
3 NARIYATH,
AGED 52 YEARS
D/O.SALIYAMMA, SHEMEER MANZIL,
KULANGARA CHERRY, CHAVARA,
KOLLAM-691583.
4 SHAMILA,
AGED 36 YEARS
W/O. MUJEEB, NELLIVILA THEKKATHIL VEEDU,
BHARANIKAVU MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-690521.
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.ABHILASH
KUM.KAVYA SOMAN
RESPONDENT/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT
1 STATE OF KERALA
THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION,
Crl.MC.No. 6692 of 2018
2
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031.
2 SINI, D/O.ABDUL BASHEER
AGED 26 YEARS, SINI MANZIL, ITHIKKARA CHERRY,
ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOTTIYAM P.O,
KOLLAM DISTRICT 691571.
BY ADVS
SRI.PRATHEESH.P
SRI T R RENJITH-PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 6692 of 2018
3
ORDER
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 petitioners herein are the accused in C.C No.302 of 2013
on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Kollam involving
offences punishable under Section 498A r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.
The de facto complainant, who is arrayed as the 2nd respondent, is the
wife of the 1st petitioner herein and petitioners 2 to 4 are the near
relatives of the 1st petitioner. In the course of their matrimonial
relationship, disputes occurred and the parties fell apart. Criminal
prosecution was initiated alleging matrimonial cruelty. However, in the
course of proceedings, with the help and intervention of family
members and relatives, the parties have settled their differences and
they are living in peace and harmony. It is in the above scenario that
this petition is filed to quash the proceedings.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners as well as the party respondent that the parties have
Crl.MC.No. 6692 of 2018
4
parted ways and the marriage has been dissolved by a decree of
divorce. All disputes have been settled amicably and in that view of
the matter, the continuance of criminal proceedings is an unwanted
exercise. The 2nd respondent has filed an affidavit, wherein she has
stated that she has no grievance against the petitioners.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has
submitted that the statement of the 2nd 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 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
Crl.MC.No. 6692 of 2018
5
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.
7. The dispute is clearly private and continuance of proceedings
will only inure to cause inconvenience and hardship to the parties.
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 proceddings pursuant thereto against the petitioners
now pending as C.C.No.302 of 2013 on the files of the Judicial
Magistrate of First Class-II, Kollam are quashed.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
IAP //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 6692 of 2018
6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE 1 THE COPY OF FIR WITH PRIVATE COMPLAINT IN
CRIME NO.242/2012 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE
STATION.
ANNEXURE 2 THE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME 242/2012
OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 3 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
REGARDING THE COMPROMISE DATED 29.09.2018.
RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:
NIL