Shobin P.D. v. State of Kerala & Others

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: K. Ramakrishnan
Judgment Date: 2014-09-03
Court Decision / Holding: The application is allowed; the proceedings in C.C. No.2418 of 2013 (Crime No.640 of 2013) before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy, are quashed. The office is directed to communicate the order to the concerned court.
Final Disposition: Quashed: The proceedings in C.C. No.2418/2013 arising from Crime No.640/2013 are quashed in view of the settlement between the parties; the matter ends with withdrawal of cases and judicial closure in the interest of justice.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Shobin P.D.

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
Sub Inspector of Police, Chalakudy Police Station, Chalakudy, Thrissur District
Sona @ Fathimath Zonnia, W/o. Shobin

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. T.M. Raman Kartha
• Smt. O.A. NuriyA

Counsels for Respondents

• Public Prosecutor, Sri Dhanesh Mathew Manjoorán

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Criminal Miscellaneous Case filed by the sole accused, Shobin P.D., seeking quashment of proceedings in C.C. No.2418 of 2013 (Crime No.640 of 2013) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy. The underlying Crime No.640/2013 was registered on a complaint by the 3rd respondent alleging offences under Sec. 498A and 406 of the IPC; the final report, however, filed only for the offence under 498A and the matter was taken on file as C.C. No.2418 of 2013. The parties, including the 3rd respondent, had been embroiled in matrimonial disputes and several cases before the Family Court. Through mediation and “well-wishers” intervention, all disputes were settled, with the parties deciding to withdraw all cases and to separate, with a divorce granted by the mediation process. The petitioner contends that since the dispute relates to a non-compoundable offence, quashing under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. is the remedy, given there is no possibility of conviction and continuing proceedings would waste judicial time. The respondents do not oppose quashing, recognising the settlement. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab is cited to support exercising the power under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings in matrimonial disputes where settlement exists.

Provisions of Law Cited

Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C.Sec. 498A IPCSec. 406 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Honour settlement in matrimonial disputes and quash proceedings (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012)
Power under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings in view of settlement

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that the settlement between the parties, including withdrawal of all cases, makes continuation of proceedings futile and risks conviction; since the offence is non-compoundable, the remedy rests with grant of quashing under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. The mediation report and final settlement indicate that the parties have agreed to divorce and withdraw all cases; no witnesses will support prosecution, making conviction unlikely. The court should honour the settlement in the interest of justice to avoid wastage of judicial time.

Contentions of Respondents

The 3rd respondent supports quashing in view of the settlement and does not wish to prosecute Further, the parties assert a broader settlement including divorce; the Public Prosecutor, though initially opposing, notes the overall settlement and the lack of other disputes, converging toward quashing if permitted by law.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab	2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)	Positive	The Supreme Court held that, in matrimonial disputes culminating in criminal cases, a settlement between the parties warrants quashing under Sec.482 Cr.P.C., even for non-compoundable offences, to avoid wastage of judicial time.

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 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/12TH BHADRA, 1936** **CRL.MC.NO. 4508 OF 2014 () ---------------------------** ## **C.C. NO.2418 OF 2013 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHALAKUDY CRIME NO.640 OF 2013 OF CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. ------------------------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :** **----------------------** **SHOBIN P.D., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.DEVASYKUTTY, PULIKKAN HOUSE, KUTTIKKAD PARIYARAM VILLAGE PIN-680721.** **BY ADVS.SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA SMT.O.A.NURIYA** ## **RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :** **-----------------------------------------** **1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.** **2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION, CHALAKUDY THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN.680307.** **3. SONA @ FATHIMATH ZONNIA, AGED 21 YEARS, W/O.SHOBIN, PULIKKAN HOUSE, KUTTIKKAD PARIYARAM VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT THOLIAL HOUSE VENNALA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682028.** **BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **NS** ## **CRL.MC.NO. 4508 OF 2014 ()** **---------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :** **------------------------** **ANNEXURE A1. COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME 640/2013 OF CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION.** **ANNEXURE A2. COPY OF THE MEDIATION REPORT DATED 26.10.2013.** **ANNEXURE A3. COPY OF THE PETITION FOR DIVORCE FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM.** **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES : NIL** **--------------------------** **NS** **/ TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE** ## **K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------Crl.M.C.No.4508 of 2014** **-------------------------------------------Dated this, the 3[rd] day of September 2014** ## **O R D E R** This is an application filed by the petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.C. No.2418 of 2013 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy for quashing the proceedings on the basis of the settlement under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'Cr.P.C.). 2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.640 of 2013 of the Chalakudy Police station which was registered on the basis of a complaint given by the 3[rd] accused originally alleging commission of offences under Sec.498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called 'IPC'). After investigation, final report was filed only for the offence under Sec.498A of the IPC and it was taken on file as C.C. No.2418 of 2013 and it is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy. Some other cases were also pending before the Family Court between the parties. Due intervention of the well-wishers of both the Crl.M.C.No.4508 of 2014 2 parties, the matter has been settled and they have decided to withdraw all the cases. Since the offence alleged is non-compoundable in nature, the petitioner could not file an application for compounding before the Court below. So, the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following relief. “ to quash Annexure A1 Final Report and the proceedings before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy in C.C. No.2418 of 2014 and allow this Cril.M.C. in the interest of justice.” 3. The 3[rd] respondent appeared through counsel submitted that, the matter has been settled between the parties and she has no objection in quashing the proceedings as in view of the settlement she does not want to prosecute the petitioner. 4. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction so he prayed for allowing the petition. Crl.M.C.No.4508 of 2014 3 5. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that except this case, there is no other case between the parties but opposed the application. 6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner married the 3[rd] respondent and there was some misunderstanding arose between them which resulted in filing of a complaint before the Police which resulted in registration of Crime No.640 of 2013 of the Chalakkudy Police station originally alleging offences under Secs.498A and 406 of the IPC. After investigation, final report was filed only for the offence under Sec.498A of the IPC and it was taken on file as C.C. No.2480 of 2013 and is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakkudy. It is also an admitted fact that there were other cases also between the parties before the Family Court and due to the intervention of well-wishers of both parties, all the disputes between them have been settled and they have decided to withdraw all the cases Crl.M.C.No.4508 of 2014 4 including the criminal prosecution registered. 7. The counsel for the 3[rd] respondent submitted that she is prepared to file an affidavit stating this fact. The petitioner has produced the mediation agreement entered into between the parties before the Ernakulam Mediation Centre at District Court (Annex-Kaloor) in which, it has been stated that the matter has been settled and they have decided to withdraw all the cases. They also decided to separate and divorce has been granted on the basis of the agreement by filing a joint petition for divorce. 8. In view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction as none of the witnesses including the defacto complainant will support the case of the prosecution. In the case of family dispute, if it is settled between the parties, the Court must always honour such settlement. 9. In the decision reported in **Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)]** , the Crl.M.C.No.4508 of 2014 5 honourable Supreme Court has held that in cases where, matrimonial disputes ended in registration of crime and ultimately the matter has been settled between the parties, then the Court must honour such settlement and even if non compoundable offences have been included, the Court must invoke the power under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such proceedings. In view of the dictum laid down in the above decision and also considering the fact that it is a matrimonial dispute which resulted in registration of crime and also other cases before the Family Court and on account of the settlement in the mediation, all the disputes have been settled and they have decided to separate and does not want to prosecute each other and conviction in such cases will be remote, this Court feels that it is a fit case where the power under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. has to be invoked to quash the proceedings as proceeding with the case will only amount to wastage of judicial time. The application is allowed and the further Crl.M.C.No.4508 of 2014 6 proceedings in C.C. No.2418 of 2013 (Crime No.640 of 2013 of the Chalakudy Police station) pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy as against the petitioner is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned Court, immediately. Sd/- **K. RAMAKRISHNAN JUDGE** NS