SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Thomman Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 3 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

Crl.MC.No.554 of 2018

CRIME NO. 633/2013 OF CHANGANASSERY POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM

PETITIONER/S:

THOMMAN JOSEPH,
S/O.KUNJARIA THOMAS, PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE,
KAVALAM NORTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688506.

BY ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN

RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 JESSY SEBASTIAN,
D/O.SEBASTIAN, THEKKEKAITHAKKAL,
PANIKKANKUDI P.O., ADIMALI, IDUKKI-685571.

** ADDL.R3: THE BRANCH MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK,
CHANGANACHERRY-686 102.

** ADDITIONAL 3RD RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 15.03.2018 IN CRL.M.A. NO.2653/2018

BY ADVS.SRI.P.M.JOSHI
SMT.SIJI K.PAUL
SRI.M.JITHESH MENON

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.12.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC:554/2018 2

ORDER

This petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime

No.633 of 2013 of the Changanacherry Police Station registered

under Sections 498A, 494 406 and 420 of the IPC.

2. The 2nd respondent is the wife of the petitioner herein. It

appears that various proceedings were pending between the parties

before the Family Court, Kottayam. Parties were referred to

mediation and an agreement was entered into and the disputes have

been settled.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submitted that the entire monetary disputes have been settled as

agreed and he prays that the proceedings be quashed.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent

submitted that the 2nd respondent has no further grievance.

5. 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.
Crl.MC:554/2018 3

6. I have considered the submissions advanced.

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 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 and

after going through Annexure-A4 settlement arrived at between the

parties, 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:554/2018 4

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A1

final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the

petitioners now pending as C.C.No.1518 of 2016 on the file of the

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Changanacherry are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
krj

//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE
Crl.MC:554/2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.633/2013 OF CHANGANACHERRY
POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2- TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE A3- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/01/2014
IN I.A.NO.6/2014 IN O.P.NO.5/14 OF THE
FAMILY COURT, ETTUMANOOR.

ANNEXURE A4- TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE WITH THE
COMPROMISE DATED 20/11/2017 OF THE FAMILY
COURT, ETTUMANNOOR.

ANNEXURE A5- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P.993/2017
OF THE FAMILY COURT, ETTUMANNOOR DATED
20/11/2017.

ANNEXURE A6- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED20/11/2017 IN
MP 460/2017 IN CMP 125/2016 OF THE FAMILY
COURT, ETTUMANOOR.

ANNEXURE A7- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN
CRL.M.C.NO.6312/2017 DATED 15/09/2017 OF
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED
15/09/2017.

ANNEXURE A8- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO.2368/17
IN CC 1518/2016 DATED 07/10/2017 OF THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,
CHANGANACHERRY.

ANNEXURE A9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20/2/2018 OF
THIS HON’BLE COURT IN CRL.M.C 554/2018

ANNEXURE A10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6/3/2018 OF
THIS HON’BLE COURT IN CRL.M.C 554/2018
ALONG WITH DOCKET

ANNEXURE A11 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15/3/2018 OF
THIS HON’BLE COURT IN CRL.M.C 554/2018
ALONG WITH DOCKET

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:-NIL

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh