Kerala High Court
Sunilkumar vs Ranjitha.V.R on 18 February, 2016
Author: P. Ubaid
Bench: P.Ubaid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/29TH MAGHA, 1937
Crl.MC.No. 905 of 2016 ()
-------------------------
CC.NO. 422/2013 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT -II,
PERINTHALMANNA
CRIME NO. 20/2013 OF MANKADA POLICE STATION,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
------------------
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
----------------------------------------
1. SUNILKUMAR, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O SUNDARAN,
KALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, 'PANCHAMI NIVAS',
ERAMTHODE, VALAMBOOR POST, ANGADIPURAM,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2. MALLIKA SUNDARAN, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O SUNDARAN,
KALAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, 'PANCHAMI NIVAS',
ERAMTHODE, VALAMBOOR POST, ANGADIPURAM,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
3. REMANI, AGED 56 YEARS,W/O. LATE DINAPALAN,
SANGEETHA NIVAS, KAYARAMPARA,
PALAPPURAM POST, OTTAPALAM.
BY ADV. SRI.R.SREEHARI
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANTS:
------------------------------------------------------
1. RANJITHA.V.R,D/O RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 24 YEARS,
VELOORANKUNNU HOUSE, EZHAKAD POST,
MUNDUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 592.
2. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
MANKADA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 321.
R1 BY ADVS. SMT.MERIN THALIATH
SRI.K.RAJESH SUKUMARAN
R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SHEEBA.M.T
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 18-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
Crl.MC.No. 905 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:
-------------------------------------------
ANNEX AI: PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE IST RESPONDENT FILED
BEFORE THE SI OF POLICE, KONGAD.
ANNEX A2: PHOTO COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.20/2013 OF MANAKADA POLICE
STATION.
ANNEX A3: PHOTO COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.20/2013 OF MANKADA
POLICE STATION FILED BEFORE THE JFCM II PERINTHALMANNA.
ANNEX A4: PHOTO COPY OF AGREEMENT IN CC 422/2013 OF JFCM II
PERINTHALMANNA AS MRC NO.586/2014.
ANNEX A5: PHOTO COPY OF THE JOINT PETITION FOR DIVORCE FILED BEFORE
THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD AS OP.NO. 927/2014.
ANNEX A6: AFFIDAVIT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT RANJITHA.V.R.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL
-----------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts
P. UBAID, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.905 of 2016
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of February, 2016
O R D E R
The petitioners herein are the accused in C.C. No.422/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perinthalmanna. They seek orders quashing the prosecution on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between them and the de facto complainant. Crime in this case was registered under Section 498- A IPC, on the complaint of one Ranjitha, who is the1st respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. She has filed affidavit to the effect that she has settled the whole dispute with the accused, and she has no grievance or complaint now. Her affidavit shows that the whole matrimonial dispute stands resolved forever. It is submitted that the marriage stands dissolved, and that the claims also stand settled. In such a situation, it is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.
2. In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution in pending proceedings, if Crl.M.C.No.905 of 2016 2 the parties have really settled the whole dispute amicably out of court, and continuance of further proceedings will not serve any purpose in such a circumstance of amicable settlement. Here, I find a real and genuine case of settlement between the parties. This is not a case involving any public interest or public issue. The parties have come to terms amicably on the intervention of persons acceptable to both sides. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will support the prosecution in such a situation, if the case goes to trial.
In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners herein in C.C. No.422/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perinthalmanna will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE sd // True Copy // P.A. to Judge