IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 26TH MAGHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 300 of 2019
CC 137/2015 of CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALAKKAD
CRIME NO. 652/2015 OF Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3:
1 SULFIKKER, AGED 34 YEARS,
S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, NOOR MAHAL, PALLATHERI,
2 ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 65 YEARS,
S/O.SYED MOHAMMED, NOOR MAHAL, PALLATHERI,
3 NOORJAHAN, AGED 55 YEARS,
W/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, NOOR MAHAL, PALLATHERI,
RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI – 682 031.
2 JISMI, AGED 27 YEARS,
W/O.SULFIKKER, RESIDING AT JISMAYA,
NOORANI (P.O.), PALAKKAD TALUK,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN – 678 004.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSE
R1 BY SRI AMJAD ALI, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 300 of 2019 2
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 2nd respondent is the wife of the 1 st petitioner. The
petitioners 2 and 3 are the parents of the 1 st petitioner. Alleging
that the petitioners subjected the 2 nd respondent to matrimonial
cruelty, a complaint was lodged, based on which Crime No.652 of
2015 was registered at the Town South Police Station. On
completion of investigation, final report was laid and the case is
now pending as C.C.No.137 of 2015 on the files of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad. In the aforesaid case, the petitioners
are charged of having committed offence punishable under
Sections 498A , 406, 323 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.
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 for the 2nd respondent, invited the
attention of this Court to the affidavit filed by her and asserts that
Crl.MC.No. 300 of 2019 3
the disputes inter se have been settled and the continuance of
criminal proceedings will only result in gross inconvenience and
hardship. It is submitted that the 2nd 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
Crl.MC.No. 300 of 2019 4
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.
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-A
final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the
petitioners now pending as C.C.No.137 of 2015 on the files of the
Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Palakkad are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
Crl.MC.No. 300 of 2019 5
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
C.C.NO.137/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, PALAKKAD.
ANNEXURE B ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10/12/2018.