Mohammed Shanu v. State of Kerala & Jusna Jahan C.

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: K. Ramakrishnan
Judgment Date: 2015-09-23
Court Decision / Holding: Application allowed; proceedings in Crime No.734/2015 of Tirur police station against the petitioner are quashed. Office to communicate the order to the concerned court.
Final Disposition: Application allowed; proceedings quashed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Mohammed Shanu

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor
Jusna Jahan C.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. C. M. Mohammed Iquabal

Counsels for Respondents

• Public Prosecutor HYMA
• Adv. Anjali G. Krishnan

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Criminal Misc. Case (Crl.M.C. No. 6221 of 2015) before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam, decided by Justice K. Ramakrishnan on 23 September 2015. The sole accused, Mohammed Shanu, seeks to quash the first information report registered as Crime No. 734/2015 at Tirur Police Station, alleging offences under sections 323, 341 and 506(1) IPC. The FIR stems from a matrimonial dispute wherein the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, Jusna Jahan C., were living separately due to a misunderstanding; the couple subsequently reconciled with the intervention of family members and well-wishers, and they have begun residing together again. The 2nd respondent has filed an affidavit stating that she does not wish to prosecute, and the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR and proceedings in the interest of justice. The Public Prosecutor opposed quashing because the case is in the crime stage. The court observed that Gian Singh v. State of Punjab empowers quashing in extreme cases to promote settlement and harmony when reunion occurs. Given the matrimonial settlement and restored harmony, the court held that continued proceedings would not serve a useful purpose. Accordingly, it quashed the proceedings against the petitioner and directed communication to the concerned court.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 482 of CrPCSections 323, 341, 506(1) of IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab doctrine: quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC to promote settlement and matrimonial harmony when reunion occurs in matrimonial disputes.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner submits that a bona fide settlement and restoration of matrimonial harmony between the spouses has occurred, with the two having resumed cohabitation. They argue that continuing criminal proceedings would serve no purpose, waste judicial resources, and perpetuate hardship after settlement. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, they contend that, in extreme family-dispute cases where settlement leads to reunion, the High Court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and proceedings to give effect to the settlement and peace between the parties.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents submit that the case is still in the crime stage and that quashing must be approached with caution. The State prosecutor questions the propriety of quashing, emphasizing the need to allow investigation and possible prosecution to run its course. Nonetheless, the 2nd respondent has filed an affidavit indicating willingness not to prosecute, and the parties have reconciled; however, the court must balance the policy of settlement with the necessity of upholding criminal law.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab	2012(4) KLT 108 (SC)	Positive	The court relied on Gian Singh to justify quashing in extreme matrimonial-dispute settlements to promote harmony.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** **WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/1ST ASWINA, 1937** **Crl.MC.No. 6221 of 2015 () --------------------------CRIME NO. 734/2015 OF TIRUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM** **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:** **----------------------** **MOHAMMED SHANU, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY, POKLASSERI HOUSE, NADUVILANGADI, POST POOKKAYIL BAZAR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL** **RESPONDENT(S)/STATE& COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** **2. JUSNA JAHAN C., AGED 23 YEARS, D/O.C.HASSAN, CHELAKKAL HOUSE, THAZHEPALAM, PO POOKAYIL BAZAR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 107.** **R2 BY ADV. SMT.ANJALI G.KRISHNAN** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT HYMA** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **:2:** _**Crl.MC.No. 6221 of 2015 () ---------------------------**_ ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** **----------------------:** **ANNEXURE A1 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.734/2015 DT 8-5-2015.** **ANNEXURE A2 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT 12-9-2015.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------: NIL** // True Copy// P.A. to Judge ss ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.** ----------------------------------------------------------------------Crl. M.C.No.6221 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 23[rd] day of September, 2015 ## **ORDER** Sole accused in Crime No.734/2014 of Thirur police station has filed this petition to quash the proceedings on the basis of the settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner and 2[nd] respondent are man and wife and they were living separately for some time due to some misunderstanding and on account of that, some incident occurred in which 2[nd] respondent said to have sustained some minor injuries. On the basis of the statement given by the 2[nd] respondent, Annexure-A1 first information report was registered as Crime No.734/2015 of Tirur police station against the petitioner alleging offences under Section 323, 341 and 506 (1) of the Indian Penal Code. Now the matter has been settled between the parties and due to the intervention of Crl. M.C.No.6221 of 2015 2 well-wishers of both the parties, they have now started residing together. So the defacto-complainant does not want to prosecute the case. On account of the settlement, even if the investigation is allowed to continue, no purpose will be served. Since it is in the crime stage, they cannot approach the police authorities or court below for recording settlement. Hence the petitioner has no other remedy, except to approach this court seeking the following relief: “It is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order quashing Annexure-A1 FIR and the proceedings in pursuant to Crime No.734/2015 of Tirur police station, for the interest of justice”. 3. 2[nd] respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties. On account of the settlement they have started residing together and she does not want to prosecute her husband, who is the accused and the petitioner herein. She had filed an affidavit stating these facts. The counsel for Crl. M.C.No.6221 of 2015 3 the petitioner also submitted that on account of the settlement, the matrimonial relationship has been restored and they are living together happily and prayed for allowing the application. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that since it is in the crime stage, it is not a fit case to invoke the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings. 5. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner and 2[nd] respondent are man and wife and due to some misunderstanding, they were living separately for some time and there was some incident occurred in continuation of the matrimonial dispute and on the basis of the statement given by the 2[nd] respondent Annexure-A1 first information report was registered as Crime No.734/2015 of Thirur police station against the petitioner alleging offences under Section 341, 323 and 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code. The Crl. M.C.No.6221 of 2015 4 matter has been now settled between the parties due to the intervention of the family members and well-wishers and the misunderstanding has been resolved and they have started residing together. The matrimonial harmony has been restored between the spouses on account of the settlement. Normally court will not invoke the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in the crime stage, as normally it will have to culminate in the usual course of filing final report and facing trial. 6. In the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012(4) KLT 108 (SC)]** , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, in the case of family disputes if any crime has been registered and if the matter has been settled and reunion has been caused on account of the settlement, then in extreme cases the court can invoke the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Crl. M.C.No.6221 of 2015 5 to quash the proceedings to promote the settlement and restoration of harmony between the spouses. 7. In view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that it is a matrimonial dispute resulted in registering the crime and on account of the settlement reunion has happened among the spouses and they are living together happily, the pendency of the case should not be a hurdle for the same and no purpose will be served by proceeding with the investigation or filing of final report on account of the settlement, this court feels that it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked to quash the proceedings, so as to promote the settlement and matrimonial harmony that has happened, which resulted in reunion of the petitioner and the 2[nd] respondent and the pendency of the case should not be a hurdle for the same. Crl. M.C.No.6221 of 2015 6 So the application is allowed and further proceedings in Crime No.734/2015 of Thirur police station as against the petitioner are hereby quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court for proper action in this regard. Sd/- ## **K. Ramakrishnan, Judge** // True Copy// P.A. to Judge ss