Shanji, Salam, Rahees and S.K. Khader v. State of Kerala and Farthah (Crl.MC No. 2422 of 2014)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: K. Ramakrishnan
Judgment Date: 2014-05-31
Court Decision / Holding: The petition is allowed; the proceedings in CC 1337/2013 (Crime No. 555/2013, Panoor Police Station) are quashed under section 482 CrPC to promote family settlement and harmony. The office is directed to communicate the order to the concerned court for necessary action.
Final Disposition: Quashed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Shanji
Salam
Rahees
S.K.Khader

Respondents

State of Kerala
Farthah

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. P.N. Sukumaran
• Sri. K.A. Anas

Counsels for Respondents

• Adv. R. Jithesh, Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Kerala High Court criminal miscellaneous case arises from a private complaint under IPC 498A r/w 34, leading to CC 1337/2013 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery, in Crime No. 555/2013 of Panoor Police Station. The petitioners—accused Nos. 1 to 4—sought to quash the final report under section 482 CrPC on the basis that a settlement has been reached between the parties through mediation, with both families agreeing to separate and withdraw the criminal proceedings. The de facto complainant (the wife of one petitioner) filed an affidavit confirming the settlement, while the State (through the Public Prosecutor) opposed quashing. The offence is admitted to be non‑compoundable, creating tension between the desire to settle and the statutory prohibition on compounding. The court invoked the principle from Gian Singh v State of Punjab, where the Supreme Court allowed quashing in matrimonial disputes upon settlement to promote family harmony. Relying on this dictum and the parties’ settlement, the court exercised its power under section 482 CrPC and quashed the proceedings in CC 1337/2013 against the petitioners, directing immediate communication of the order for necessary action by the concerned court.

Provisions of Law Cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 482Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 156(3)Indian Penal Code, Section 498AIndian Penal Code, Section 34

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that a settlement has been reached between the parties through mediation and family intervention. They contend that, since the offence is non‑compoundable, they could not file a separate compounding petition but have approached the High Court under section 482 CrPC to quash the final report and CC No.1337/2013 to restore family harmony. The de facto complainant has filed an affidavit in support of withdrawal, and there is no reasonable possibility of conviction.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents acknowledge the settlement and withdrawal by the parties but oppose quashing on the ground that the offence under IPC 498A is non‑compoundable. The Public Prosecutor opposed quashing, although the de facto complainant and witnesses are willing to withdraw; the court’s reliance on mediation and settlement is tempered by the statutory non‑compoundability.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v State of Punjab	2012(4) KLT 108(SC)	Positive	Supreme Court held that in matrimonial disputes involving non‑compoundable offences, a settlement facilitated by mediation may justify quashing under 482 CrPC to promote family harmony; the current court follows this principle.

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** ## **SATURDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2014/10TH JYAISHTA, 1936** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2422 of 2014 ()** **--------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1337/2013 of ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY ---------------------------------------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS.1-4:** **----------------------------------------------------** **1. SHANJI AGED 28 YEARS S/O.ABDULLA, AAYISHAS, KUNJIPARAMBATH THAZHE CHAMBAD, PANOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT.** **2. SALAM, AGED 32 YEARS S/O.ABDULLA, AAYISHAS, KUNJIPARAMBATH THAZHE CHAMBAD, PANOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT.** **3. RAHEES, AGED 36 YEARS S/O.ABDULLA, AAYISHAS, KUNJIPARAMBATH THAZHE CHAMBAD, PANOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT.** **4. S.K.KHADER, AGED 60 YEARS S/O.MAMMU, MUSTHALIYAS (H), KATHIROOR PONNIYAM, KANNUR DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS.SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN SRI.K.A.ANAS** ## **RESPONDENT(S)/DEFECTO COMPLAINANT:** **--------------------------------------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA** - **REPRESENTED BY THE S.I POLICE, PANOOR WHO IS REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.** **2. FARTHAH,, AGED 20 YEARS** - **D/O.ASHRAF, CHATHUPPERRI (H), KUNNOTHUPARAMBU P.O PANOOR, THALASSERI, KANNUR DISTRICT-670692.** **BY ADVE.R.JITHESH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31-05-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2422 of 2014 ()** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** **-------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED AS CRIME NO.555/13 OF PANOOR POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED AGAINST PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4 IN CRIME NO.555/13 OF PANOOR POLICE STATION, BEFORE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THALASSERY.** **ANNEXURE 3: AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL** **---------------------------------------** R.AV TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE ## **K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. -----------------------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.2422 of 2014** **------------------------------------------------Dated this the 31[st] day of May, 2014** ## **ORDER** This is an application filed by the petitioners who are accused in C.C No.1337/2013 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement u/s 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that petitioners are arrayed as accused numbers 1 to 2 in C.C No.1337/2013 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery. It was registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the de facto complainant which was forwarded to the police for investigation by the learned Magistrate u/s 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and on the basis of the same, originally, a crime was registered as Crime No.555/2013 of Panoor Police Station Crl.M.C No.2422/2014 2 u/s 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation, Annexure A2 final report was filed and that was taken on file as C.C No.1337/2013 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalassery. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties due to intervention of mediators. Since the offence alleged is non-compoundable in nature, they could not file an application before the court concerned to compound the case. So they have no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief: _i) Quash Annexure - 2 Final Report in C.C No.1337/2013 of additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery and all further proceedings pursuant there to against the petitioners herein and all further proceedings initiated pursuant thereto._ _ii) Such other reliefs sought for during pendency of this proceedings._ Crl.M.C No.2422/2014 3 3. Second respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties and on the basis of the settlement they have decided to separate and to withdraw all the cases. In view of the settlement she had filed Annexure A3 affidavit stating these facts. 4. Counsel for petitioners also submitted that in view of the settlement, conviction will not be possible and so he prayed for allowing the application. 5. The application was opposed by the Public Prosecutor. 6. It is an admitted fact that on the basis of a private complaint filed by the second respondent as de facto complainant, who is the wife of first petitioner, before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery alleging offence u/s 498(A) r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioners which Crl.M.C No.2422/2014 4 was forwarded to the police for investigation, by the learned Magistrate, u/s 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, Annexure A1 First Information Report was registered as Crime No.555/2013 of Panoor Police Station against the petitioners alleging commission of the above said offence. After investigation Annexure A2 final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.C No.1337/2013 and it is pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties due to the intervention of mediators and family members. On account of the settlement, they decided to separate and withdraw the criminal proceedings as well. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction as neither the de facto complainant nor the witnesses will support the prosecution. Further, since it is a family dispute which has been Crl.M.C No.2422/2014 5 settled due to the intervention of well wishers and the family members of both parties, pendency of the same could not be a hurdle for happy life as well. 7. 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 matrimonial dispute involving offence u/s 498(A) if the matter has been settled between family members due to the intervention of mediators, then, the court must give effect to such settlement and invoking the power u/s Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the criminal prosecution has to be quashed. 8. In view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that it is a family dispute which resulted in registration of the crime and the matter has been settled between the parties and they have decided to separate and withdraw the Crl.M.C No.2422/2014 6 prosecution and no possibility of conviction in such cases, this court feels that power u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked to quash the proceedings to promote family settlement and harmony that has been caused due to the settlement among the family members. So the petition is allowed and further proceedings in C.C No.1337/2013 (Crime No. 555/2013 of Panoor Police Station) pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thalassery as against the petitioners is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned immediately for necessary further action in the matter. ## **K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE** vdv