IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 273 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ALEXANDER ABRAHAM, S/O ABRAHAM AGED 50 YEARS, THARAPPEL HOUSE, MARAMCHATTI, KOOMBARA PO, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (THIRUVALLA) RESPONDENT: ------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,(VADAKARA R URAL), VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE,. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF .OF POLICE, MUKKAM. 4. SHAKLIL AHAMED S/O.ASHRAF, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, ULLATTIL HOUSE, ALANALLOOR PO, BEEMANAD SCHOOLPADY, MANNARKAD, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R1 TO R3 ADV. SRI.BOBY MATHEW FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.273 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF AUGUST, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. This judgment must be read in continuation of earlier orders dated 10.7.2009, 14.7.2009, 24.7.2009 and 30.7.2009. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India complaining that his daughter Ms.Rinku Alexander, a student of the 12th Standard in the Don Bosco School, Mambetta, Mukkam Kozhikode, has been illegally taken away by the 4th respondent. This petition was filed on 10.7.2009. The same was admitted on that day. It was adjourned from time to time. When the case stood posted to 3.8.2009, the alleged detenue along with the 4th respondent appeared before this Court on 30.7.2009. The case was advanced to that day and taken up for consideration. 3. As per order dated 30.7.2009, this Court accepted the statement of Ms.Rinku Alexander, who asserted that she wants to go along with her father, the petitioner herein. From that day W.P.(Crl.)No.273/09 -2- Ms.Rinku Alexander (an adult major, she having crossed the age of 18 years prior to the date of her alleged missing- date of birth 7.1.1991) continues to be with the petitioner, her father. 4. The fourth respondent had taken up a contention that Ms.Rinku Alexander was abducted and that she had left the petitioner on her own. She was converted to Islam and had allegedly entered into matrimony with the 4th respondent on 23.7.2009. He produced a certificate issued by the Sirajul Islam Madrassa and Shafi Masjid, Tirupur also to confirm such alleged marriage. 5. While permitting the alleged detenue, Ms.Rinku Alexander to go with the petitioner, this Court had directed that an attempt be made to mediate and settle the dispute. Accordingly, the parties were referred to a Mediator. 6. It is now reported that the parties have settled their disputes. A joint compromise statement, duly signed by the petitioner herein, the alleged detenue and the 4th respondent and countersigned by their respective counsel, has been taken on file. A joint petition has been filed by the parties with the prayer W.P.(Crl.)No.273/09 -3- that all further proceedings in Crime No.191/09 of Mukkam Police Station registered in respect of the missing/disappearance of Ms.Rinku Alexander may be discontinued and the crime quashed. 7. The terms of the settlement are incorporated in the joint compromise statement filed by the parties duly counter signed by their counsel dated 19.8.2009 as also the earlier memorandum of agreement dated 6.8.2009 reached before the Mediator. The gist of the terms of the compromise is that the petitioner and the alleged detenue shall be at liberty to move the Family Court to get a declaration annulling the alleged marriage between the alleged detenue and the 4th respondent. By way of abundant caution and to avoid any possible other disputes, the 4th respondent has also pronounced triple talak and had divorced the alleged detenue as mutually consented. The 4th respondent has further agreed simultaneously that he shall co-operate with the petitioner and the alleged detenue to get the alleged marriage annulled in accordance with law. 8. We are satisfied that the joint compromise statement filed by the parties can be accepted and this Writ Petition can be W.P.(Crl.)No.273/09 -4- disposed of as agreed. We are further satisfied that the prayer in I.A.No.10570/09 can be accepted in the light of the admitted settlement of the disputes. The learned Government Pleader on behalf of the police submits that the State also has no objection in the said FIR being quashed now. Of course, the ideal procedure to be followed would have been to file a separate petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and to invoke the extraordinary inherent jurisdiction available to the High Court in the light of the decisions in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003(SC) 1386), Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab (2008(3) KLT 19), Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008(3) KLT 769(SC) and Manoj Sharma v. State (2008(4) KLT 417 (SC). We are satisfied in the peculiar facts and circumstances that this Court can now invoke such jurisdiction under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to direct quashing and discontinuance of further proceedings in Crime No.191/09 of Mukkam Police Station. 9. In the result: (a) this Writ Petition is allowed in part. W.P.(Crl.)No.273/09 -5- (b) the alleged detenue Rinku Alexander is permitted to continue to be with her parents. (c) I.A.No.10570/09 is allowed as agreed by all concerned and all further proceedings in Crime No.191/09 of Mukkam Police Station is ordered to be quashed and discontinued. 10. The memorandum of agreement entered into by the parties before the Mediator on 6.8.2009 and the joint compromise statement dated 19.8.2009 executed by them shall both be appended to this judgment. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn