IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 [CASE NUMBER] AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN [CASE NUMBER] ON THE FILES OF THE [SECTION], [CASE NUMBER] OF [ACT], PALAKKAD PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1, 3 AND 4: 1 [ENTITY], AGED 36 YEARS, S/O VASU, CHEENIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAYOOR PO, VANIYAMKULAM VILLAGE, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2 [ENTITY], AGED 60 YEARS, W/[ENTITY], CHEENIKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAYOOR P.O., VANIYAMKULAM VILLAGE, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3 [ENTITY], AGED 32 YEARS, CHEENIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAYOOR P.O., VANIYAMKULAM VILLAGE, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. [ENTITY] RESPONDENT/S: 1 [ENTITY], REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031. 2 [ENTITY], AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. MATHAI, KOCHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, SACHIVOTHAMAPURAM.P.O., KURICHI VILLAGE, CHENGANACHERRY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686101. R2 BY ADV. SHRI [ENTITY] R1 BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. [ENTITY] THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: [CASE NUMBER] 2 ORDER
This petition is filed under [SECTION] of the [ACT] ('the Code" for brevity) with a prayer to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioners.
2. The 2nd respondent is the former wife of the 1 st petitioner. The 2nd petitioner is his mother and the 3rd petitioner is alleged to be his present wife.
3. It is on the basis of information given by the 2 nd respondent that the above crime was registered. According to the 2nd respondent, the 1st petitioner had married her on 8.12.2009 and a child was born. Thereafter, the petitioners 1 and 2 started harassing her, mentally and physically, demanding dowry. She further alleges that during the subsistence of her marriage with the 1st petitioner, he married the 3rd petitioner. Stating these allegations, a complaint was lodged, based on which, [CASE NUMBER] of the Shornur Police Station was registered. After investigation, final report has been laid and the case is now pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-2, Ottapalam as [CASE NUMBER]. The petitioners are charged for having committed offence punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION]/[SECTION] of the [ACT].
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the 2nd respondent had filed [CASE NUMBER] before the learned Magistrate and in the course of the said proceedings, the entire disputes were settled through mediation. The learned counsel has referred to Annexure-A2 affidavit sworn to by the 2nd respondent and Annexure-A3 joint statement and it was contended that the 2nd respondent has no further grievance. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submitted that the parties have decided to put an end to their discord and have decided to part ways. It is urged that the dispute is purely private in nature. 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 2nd 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.
7. In [PRECEDENT] and in [PRECEDENT], 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 [PRECEDENT], 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] 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] of the Code to quash the proceedings.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed. Annexure-A1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioners now pending as [CASE NUMBER] on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-2, Ottapalam are quashed.
[ENTITY], JUDGE krj TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN [CASE NUMBER] ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-2, OTTAPPALAM ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.86/2014 OF [ACT].
ANNEXURE A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DISCLOSING SETTLEMENT OF ALL DISPUTES.
ANNEXURE A3 JOINT STATEMENT MADE BY THE PETITIONERS AND THE SECOND RESPONDENTS SEEKING QUASHING OF ALL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UPON ANNEXURE A1.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL