Shibu and Anandavally v. Anupa Sivan and State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** **THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/5TH ASHADHA, 1936** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3287 of 2014** **--------------------------CC NO. 812/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **.....** **CRIME NO. 489/2011 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION , KOLLAM** **......** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:** **--------------------------------------------------------** ## **1. SHIBU, AGED 33 YEARS,** **S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, NEDUVILA VEEDU, KANJIRAMKOTTU MURI, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KUNDARA, KOLLAM.** **2. ANANDAVALLY, AGED 58 YEARS, W/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN, NEDUVILA VEEDU, KANJIRAMKOTTU MURI, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KUNDARA, KOLLAM.** **BY ADVS.SRI.PRATHEESH.P SMT.BINDU GEORGE** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:** **--------------------------------------------------------------------** **1. ANUPAMA SIVAN,, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.VASANTHI, MULAVILAYIL VEEDU, ANAYADI MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SHASTHAMCOTTA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.** ## **2. STATE OF KERALA,** **REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOORANADU POLICE STATION THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **Kss** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3287 of 2014** **--------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:** **---------------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE-1: COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.489/2011 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE-2: COPY OF FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED IN CRIME NO.489/2011 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE-3: COPY OF AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15.05.2014.** **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES:** **----------------------------------------------N I L** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.A.TO JUDGE** **Kss** ## K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J. -----------------------------------------------------------------Crl.M.C. No.3287 of 2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 26[th] day of June, 2014 ## O R D E R This criminal miscellaneous case is filed by accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C.No.812/2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta, to quash the proceedings on the basis of settlement under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the 'Code'). 2. It is alleged in the petition that, the first petitioner married the defacto-complainant and while they were living together, there was some difference of opinion arose and on the basis of the complaint filed by the defactocomplainant/1[st] respondent, a case has been registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners as Crime No.489/2011 of Sooranadu police station and after investigation, final report was filed and it is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Crl.M.C.No. 3287 / 2014 2 Sasthamcotta, as C.C.812/2011. The matter has been now settled between the parties due to the intervention of mediators. On account of the mediation, the marriage has been dissolved and they have decided to withdraw all the other cases on the basis of settlement. So there is no purpose in proceeding with the case. Since the offences alleged are non-compoundable in nature, the petitioners have no other remedy, except to approach this court, seeking the following relief: “On these and among other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, this Hon'ble court may be pleased to quash Annexure-1 & 2, FIR and Final report in Crime No.489/2011 of Sooranadu police station and the proceedings in C.C. No.812/2011 on the file of JFMC, Sasthamcotta in the ends of justice”. 3. The first respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that, the matter has been settled between the parties and she does not want to prosecute the petitioners on account of the settlement. She had filed Annexure-III affidavit stating these facts. 4. The counsel for the petitioners submitted Crl.M.C.No. 3287 / 2014 3 that, in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction. So he prayed for allowing the application. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that, it is not a fit case to invoke power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at this stage to quash the proceedings. 6. It is an admitted fact that, first accused married the first respondent and 2[nd] accused is his mother. It is also an admitted fact that after sometime, on account of some difference of opinion between the spouses, the first respondent left the matrimonial home and on the basis of the complaint given by the defacto-complainant/1[st] respondent, Crime No.489/2011 of Sooranadu police station was registered against the petitioners, alleging offence under Section 498(A) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation, final report was filed and it is now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta as C.C.812/2011. The Crl.M.C.No. 3287 / 2014 4 matter has been now settled between the parties due to the intervention of mediators and it is also seen from the affidavit filed by the 1[st] respondent that, on the basis of the settlement, first respondent herself has decided to separate and accordingly, as per order in O.P.(HMA) No.350/2011, divorce was obtained by mutual consent. She does not want to prosecute the petitioners on account of the settlement. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction, neither the defacto-complainant nor her witnesses will support the case of the prosecution. 7. Further 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 arising between the spouses or family members and the dispute is settled between the parties on account of the intervention of mediators and they wanted to have harmony, then court must honour such settlement and even if non-compoundable offence have been alleged, court must invoke the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings to promote settlement in family disputes”. Crl.M.C.No. 3287 / 2014 5 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 crime and filing of final report, which has been ultimately settled between the parties and no possibility of conviction in such cases, this court feels that it is a fit case where the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be invoked to quash the proceedings, to promote settlement and harmony that has been brought in on account of the settlement in the family of both defacto-complainant and the accused persons. The pendency of this case should not be a hurdle for the same. So the petition is allowed and further proceedings in C.C.812/2011 (Crime No.489/2011 of Sooranadu police station) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Sasthamcotta, is hereby quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately, for necessary further action. Crl.M.C.No. 3287 / 2014 6 With the above direction and observation, this criminal miscellaneous case is disposed of. Sd/- K. Ramakrishnan, Judge // True Copy // P.A. to Judge ss