Kerala High Court
Roumi Hassan vs The State Of Kerala on 1 June, 2012
Author: S.S.Satheesachandran
Bench: S.S.Satheesachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/25TH KARTHIKA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 2806 of 2012 ()
--------------------------
CRIME NO.745/2012 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
---------------------------------------
1. ROUMI HASSAN, S/O.HASSANKUNJU, RESIDING AT KOTTACKAD HOUSE,
PERUNNA EAST P.O., CHANGANACHERRY,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686102. (A1)
2. DR.HASSANKUNJU, S/O.LATE ABDUL RAHMANKUNJU, AGED 68 YEARS,
RESIDING AT KOTTACKAD HOUSE, PERUNNA EAST P.O.,
CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 102 (A2)
3. SUHARA HASSAN, W/O.HASSANKUNJ, AGED 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT
KOTTACKAD HOUSE, PERUNNA EAST P.O.,
CHANGANACHERRY,KOTTAYAM DISRICT - 686 102 (A3)
4. NOUSHAD, S/O.LATE KASSIM BAVA, RESIDING AT PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
NEAR PRIVATE STAND 1, CHANGANACHERRY,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 101 (A4)
5. RIZVI HASSAN, S/O.HASSANKUNJU, RESIDING AT KOTTACKAD HOUSE,
PERUNNA EAST P.O., CHANGANACHERRY,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT- 686 102 (A5)
6. RISHI HASSAN, S/O.HASSANKUNJU, RESIDING AT KOTTACKAD HOUSE,
PERUNNA EAST P.O., CHANGANACHERRY,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 102 (A6)
BY ADV. SRI.S.M.ALTHAF
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
---------------------------------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURTOF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. FOUSIA, D/O.ASINA BEEVI, MADAPPALLIL VEED, PUZHIKKAD MURI,
KURANMALA VILLAGE, PANDALAM.PIN-689 121
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA
R2 BY ADV. SMT.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 16-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
CRMC.NO.2806/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEX A1 COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.745/2012 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION,
DATED 01/06/2012
ANNEX A2 COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT ENTERED IN B.A.NO.3844/12 BEFORE THIS
HON'BLE COURT BETWEEN THE 1ST PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED NIL
ANNEX A3 COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT GIVEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO FILE
BEFORE THE HON'BLE COURT DATED 2/8/2012
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO.JUDGE
sts
S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2806 of 2012
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of November, 2012
O R D E R
Petitioners are the accused in a crime case registered at Pandalam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 498A and 394 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. A crime was registered on a complaint given by the 2nd respondent, who is the wife of the 1st petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Adoor and it being referred to the police for investigation and report under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure {for short, 'the Code'}. Annexure A1 is the FIR registered in the crime against the petitioners/accused. Pending the petition, it is submitted, when the petitioners Crl.M.C.No.2806 of 2012 :: 2 ::
moved an application to seek pre-arrest bail before this court, after notice was given, the 2nd respondent got impleaded in such proceedings and the parties were referred to mediation to explore the possibility of a settlement. Essentially, the crime was registered on a complaint raised by the 2nd respondent over matrimonial cruelty imputed by the petitioners and that prompted reference to mediation. In the mediation proceedings, parties have reached a settlement and the terms thereof arrived at are recorded in Annexure A2. They have resolved to settle all disputes and terminate other proceedings as well pending before the Family Court, is the submission of the counsel on both sides. In the aforesaid circumstances, quashing of Annexure A1 FIR registered in the crime and proceedings arising thereof is canvassed by the petitioners over which the 2nd respondent has no objection at all.
Crl.M.C.No.2806 of 2012
:: 3 ::
2. In the light of the settlement effected by the parties, that too through mediation on reference by this court, I find continuation of the proceedings arising from Annexure A1 FIR has to be terminated. The Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab {2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)} has held that crime cases, involving non-compoundable offences too, where such offences predominantly have civil flavour or arise out of matrimonial disputes, they can be quashed by this court invoking its inherent powers when there is a settlement by parties giving a quietus to all disputes, which could be treated as personal to them.
3. Taking note of the settlement effected by the parties in the present case where the parties have resolved all disputes which have given rise to Annexure A1 crime, I find, criminal proceedings against the petitioners thereof are liable to be quashed.
Crl.M.C.No.2806 of 2012
:: 4 ::
4. Criminal proceedings against the petitioners from Annexure A1 FIR and further proceedings thereof are quashed invoking the inherent powers of this court under Section 482 of the Code.
Crl.M.C is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
(S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN) JUDGE sk/-
//true copy//