Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE25H DAY OF FEBRUARY20146TH PHALGUNA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 1233 of 2014 ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER
IN CC9372011 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOLLAM CRIME NO. 1635/2010 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION , KOLLAM ---------- PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. RAJESH, AGED34YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVAN, EDAKKAVILA VEEDU, NEAR LPS ANAKKOTTUR MURI, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
2. VAMAKSHI, AGED68YEARS, D/O.KUNJI PILLAI, AJITHA BHAVAN, NEAR LPS ANAKKOTTUR MURI, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
3. DILEEP KUMAR, S/O.SURENDRAN, AJITHA BHAVAN, NEAR LPS ANAKKOTTUR MURI, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
4. AJITHA, AGED43YEARS, D/O.VAMAKSHI, AJITHA BHAVAN, NEAR LPS ANAKKOTTUR MURI, NEDUVATHOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2. RAJAN, AGED29YEARS, D/O.SANTHAKUMARI, RESIDING AT KOTTOOR KIZHAKKATHIL, PERUMPUZHATHAZHAM, PERUMPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691033. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SAREENA GEORGE P. R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.ANIL KUMAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2502-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PJ Crl.MC.No. 1233 of 2014 ---------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNEXURE-1. THE COPY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINT AND FIR IN CRIME NO.1635/2010 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-2. THE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1635/2010 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE-3. THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE2D RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINT REGARDING COMPROMISE DATED71/2014. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1233 of 2014 --------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of February, 2014 ORDER
This is an application filed by the accused in C.C.No.937/2011 in Crime No.1635/2010 at Kundara Police station, Kollam was on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I, Kollam for quashing proceedings after recording the composition recording into between them and the defacto complainant under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code.
2. It is alleged in the petition that the 1st petitioner married to the 2nd respondent as per custom and thereafter they were resided together as husband and wife. After sometime, the love between them lost and they started residing separately. There were certain litigations between them. The 2nd respondent filed a private complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I , Kollam against the petitioners as Annexure-1 alleging offences under Section 498A, 323 and Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and that was forwarded to police for investigation by the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Criminal Procedure Code and a crime was registered as Crime No. in 1635/2010 of Kundara Police Station. After investigation, Annexure A2 final report was filed against the petitioners, which was taken on file as CC No.937/2011 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kollam and that case is pending before that Court. While so, they have settled the disputes Crl.M.C. No.1233 of 2014 2 with the defacto complainant and as part of settlement now they are residing together. The defacto complainant filed Annexure 3 affidavit stating that the matter has been settled between parties and now they are residing together and she does not want to proceed with the case further. Since the offence alleged is in non- compoundable in nature, they cannot file any application before the court below for withdrawal of the complaint or compound the case. So they have no options but to approach this Court seeking the following relief: "On these and among other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, this Honourable court may be pleased to quash Annexure - I Private Complainant and FIR, Annexure 2 Final report in Crime No.1635/2010 of Kundara Police Station and all further proceedings in C.C.No.937/2011 of JFCM -1, Kollam in the ends of justice" 3. The 2nd respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the second respondent and petitioners. Now she joined with her husband, who is the 1st petitioner here. She has filed an affidavit to that effect also. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was a reunion happened and the 1st petitioner and 2nd respondent are living together now.
4. The application was opposed by the Public Prosecutor.
5. It is an admitted fact that the 1st petitioner married the Crl.M.C. No.1233 of 2014 3 1st respondent and when difference of opinion arose between them, they started living separately and at that instance the 2nd respondent, a crime was registered as Crime No.1635/2010 of Kundara police station against the petitioners alleging offence under Section 498A, 323 and Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. It is also an admitted fact that after investigation, final report was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate No.1, Kollam and that court has taken cognizance of the case as CC No.937/2011 and it is pending before that Court. Now due to the intervention of relatives and well wishers, the matter has been settled between the defacto complainant and the petitioners and the marital relation ship between them are restored and they are living together happily now. The 2nd respondent also filed an affidavit as Annexure 3 narrating these facts and expressing her no objection in quashing the proceedings in view of the settlement. In Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT108, it has been held that in matrimonial disputes, if the parties have settled the claim due to the intervention of the family members and well wishers and prosecution should not stand in the way of settlement and court must promote that settlement and invoke the power under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings with a view to honour settlement arrived at between the spouses due to Crl.M.C. No.1233 of 2014 4 intervention of family members .
6. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that the dispute between the 1st petitioner and 2nd respondent have been settled due to the intervention of mediators, and they have re-united and living as husband and wife happily and there is no purpose served by allowing the case to continue as no conviction will be possible on account of the settlement, this Court feels that, this is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code has to be invoked to quash the proceedings to promote the re-union happened between the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent and to allow them to lead a happy married life and the pendency of the case would not be a hurdle for their happy married life. So the petition is allowed and the further proceedings in CC No.937/2011 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court 1, Kollam is here by quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Magistrate Court for further necessary action in this regard. K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE jm/