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. 8067 of 2018
CRIME NO. 1197/2018 OF Thaliparamba Police Station, Kannur
1 SIDDIQUE K.M.,
AGED 38 YEARS,
S/O.THARAMMAL MAMMU,KAPPALLI MANNATTI HOUSE,
2 ASMA K.M.,
AGED 45 YEARS,
D/O.THARAMMAL MAMMU,KAPPALLI MANNATTI HOUSE,
SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION,
KANNUR DISTRCIT, PIN-670 141.
AGED 28 YEARS,
R3 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
R1 R2 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. 8067 of 2018 2
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (“the Code” for brevity).
2. The 3rd respondent is the de facto complainant in Crime
No.1197 of 2018 of Taliparamba Police Station. The 1 st petitioner
is the husband of the de facto complainant and the 2 nd petitioner is
her sister-in-law. They are being proceeded against for having
committed offence punishable under Section 498A r/w. Section 34
of the IPC.
3. The instant proceeding is filed with a prayer to quash
the proceedings on the ground of settlement of all disputes. The
3rd 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 submits that the statement of the 3 rd respondent has been
recorded and the State has no objection in terminating the
proceedings as it involves no public interest.
Crl.MC.No. 8067 of 2018 3
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 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 extra ordinary powers
under Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings.
Crl.MC.No. 8067 of 2018 4
In the result, this petition will stand allowed.
Annexure-A1 first information report in Crime No.1197 of 2018 of
Taliparamba Police Station and all proceedings pursuant thereto
against the petitioners are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
DSV/- //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 8067 of 2018 5
ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.1197/2018
DATED 05.11.2018 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE
ANNEXURE A2 THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT