IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 17TH POUSHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 7923 of 2017
AGAINST THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.1758/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOCHI ARISING OUT OF
CRIME NO. 1067/2015 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 2:
1 VARGHESE NITHISH,
AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.JACOB, H.NO.23/1753 C,
CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, DON BOSCO ROAD,
2 LISSY JACOB,
W/O.JACOB, H.NO.23/1753 C,CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE,
DON BOSCO ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI-6.
BY ADV. SRI.M.H.HANIS
RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT STATE:
1 STELLA DITTA,
D/O.JOSEPH T.A., AGED 33 YEARS, THEKKINAPPILLY HOUSE,
INFANT JESUS CROSS ROAD, VADUTHALA P.O., ERNAKULAM,
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KOCHI CUSBA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.
SRI C K PRASAD-PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
2. The petitioners herein are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in C.C
No.1758 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First
Class-II, Kochi involving offences punishable under Sections 498A
is arrayed as the 1st respondent, is the wife of the 1st petitioner
herein. The 2nd petitioner is the mother of the 1st petitioner.
3. The instant petition is filed with a prayer to quash the
proceedings on the ground of settlement of all disputes. The 1st
respondent has filed an affidavit stating that she does not wish to
continue with the prosecution proceedings against the petitioners.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has obtained instructions.
He submitted that the statement of the 1 st 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.
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 extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the
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.1758 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate of First Class-II, Kochi are quashed.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL CHARGE IN
C.C.NO.1758/2015 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE’S COURT-II, KOCHI
ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.1067/2015 OF
KOCHI CUSBA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
ANNEXURE B AFFIDAVIT OF THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT.