IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940 Crl.MC.No. 8057 of 2018 IN CC NO.1460/2016 ON THE FILES OF J.M.F.C., PARAPPANANGADI [CASE NUMBER] OF THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: 1 ABDUL MANAF, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.ULLAT ALAVI HAJI, ULLAT HOUSE, KUMANNA, CHENAKKAL, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 636. 2 ULLAT ALAVI HAJI, AGED 55 YEARS, KUNHIMOIDEEN ULLAT HOUSE, KUMANNA, CHENAKKAL, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 636. 3 RUKHIYA, AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.ULLAT ALAVI HAJI, ULLAT HOUSE, KUMANNA, CHENAKKAL, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 636. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. (IN [CASE NUMBER] THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION). 2 MUBASSINA, AGED 24 YEARS, D/O.MOHAMMED MUSTHAFA, ELAMBILAKAD HOUSE, KANNANCHERY, MOONNIYUR P.O., TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 311. BY ADV. SRI.BINU V V VEETTIL VALAPPIL OTHER PRESENT: SRI. [ENTITY] - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.12.2018, 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).
2. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant in [CASE NUMBER] on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Parappanangadi. The petitioners herein are the husband and in-laws of the 2nd respondent and they are being proceeded against for having committed offence punishable under [SECTION] of the [ACT].
3. The instant petition is filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings on the ground of settlement of all disputes. The 2nd 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 2 nd 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.
6. 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. 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, Parappanangadi are quashed.
[ENTITY], JUDGE KRJ TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FINAL REPORT IN [CASE NUMBER] OF THE THENHIPPALAM POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT DATED 24/11/2018.
ANNEXURE A3 THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 24/11/2018 SWORN IN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT (DE-FACT0 COMPLAINANT).