The court has the power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, but it should not be exercised if there are sufficient materials to prima facie see the commission of the alleged offence.

The 2nd accused in C.C.No.1641/2016 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Attingal, arising out of Crime No.1254 of 2015 of Attingal Police Station, who alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (` IPC ’ for short), has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C’ for short), to quash the final report, contending that there is no material to attract offence punishable under of against the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the relevant documents.

3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner being roped into this crime without any justification and the prosecution records do not suggest her involvement in this crime to proceed against the petitioner and, therefore, the prayer in the petition is liable to be allowed. It is also pointed out that there were family disputes in between the defacto complainant, who is none other than the wife of the brother of the petitioner, and for which the petitioner periodically lodged complaints through e-mail and other modes to the police officials. In order to wreak vengeance against those complaints at the instance of the petitioner, she got incorporated into this proceedings, though no materials available to justify her involvement in this crime, in any manner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that on 20th March, 2023, an affidavit was filed by the defacto complainant stating that she had no dispute in allowing quashment in view of settlement. But the settlement was not materialised. Accordingly, the petitioner filed another affidavit retracting from the settlement. He also submitted that now the petitioner has been staying abroad and her passport also was renewed. But the passport authority insists on production of no objection from the Court or order of acquittal in this crime to avoid impounding of the passport. Therefore, he also pressed for an appropriate order facilitating travel of the petitioner abroad.

5. Though there is no representation from the defacto complainant, the learned Public Prosecutor read out the relevant portion of the FIS as well as the statements available, which would suggest commission of offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC by the petitioner/2nd accused, as well. Therefore, the learned Public Prosecutor would submit that quashment sought for is not liable to be allowed.

6. I have perused the F.I statement given by the defacto complainant. There is specific allegation that the husband of the defacto complainant is a mental patient undergoing treatment for the last 30 years and as and when the petitioner herein reached home country from abroad, she used to persecute and ill treat the defacto complainant along with her mother, who is the 1st accused.

There is an allegation that the accused persons in this crime even not allowed the defacto complainant to cook food at the kitchen of the house and she was forced to stay at a shed outside the house. It is alleged further that the mental disease of the husband of the defacto complainant was suppressed and she was forced to marry such a person.

7. Though, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, earlier there was a settlement, now the defacto complainant retracted from settlement. Going by the prosecution records it is discernible that there are sufficient materials to see the commission of offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC by the petitioner also, prima facie, and merely because she also lodged complaints vide Annexures C to L, the same by itself would not give a clean chit to the petitioner.

8. In such view of the matter, the matter shall go for trial.

Therefore, quashment sought for is liable to fail.

9. Coming to Crl.M.Appl.No.2/2024, which has been filed by the petitioner seeking grant for permission/no objection to the issuance/renewal of the