SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 41444

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J
SHAREEF.C.T – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl.MC/617/2017



Advocates:
SRI.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI, SRI.P.M.MOHAMMED HASSAN, SRI.E.C.BINEESH

The court affirmed the necessity to encourage settlements in matrimonial disputes, exercising its discretion under Section 482 to prevent court abuse.

Headnote:

Quash - Matrimonial Disputes - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 482 - The court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482, emphasizing the importance of encouraging genuine settlements in matrimonial disputes and preventing abuse of the court process.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings initiated by his wife under various IPC sections following a settlement reached between them.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had amicably resolved their disputes and that continuing the criminal proceedings would cause unnecessary hardship, establishing that encouraging settlements is a judicial duty.

Issues: Whether to quash ongoing criminal proceedings due to mutual settlement in a matrimonial dispute.

Ratio Decidendi: The court exercised its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stating that encouraging genuine settlements in matrimonial matters is essential and prevents abuse of the court process.

Final Decision: All proceedings against the petitioner are quashed.

O R D E R

1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( 'the Code” for brevity ) with a prayer to quash the proceedings pending against the petitioner.

2.On the basis of a complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent herein, who is the wife of the petitioner, cognizance was taken for offences punishable under Sections 321, 498 (A), 406 read with 34 of the IPC against the petitioner and the case is now pending as C.C.No.980 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Thamarassery.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the respondents. It is submitted that it was due to temperamental differences and minor skirmishes which usually occur between husband and wife in the course of Crl.M.C.617/2017 2 their matrimonial relationship. According to the learned counsel appearing for the parties, during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement and the terms have been reduced into writing. Reference is made to Annexure-A3 agreement signed by both parties in the presence of witnesses. Taking note of the fact that the matrimonial relationship had broken down irretrievably the parties have taken the painful decision to part ways after settling all their disputes. On the basis of the agreement between the parties, an affidavit sworn to by the 2nd respondent is also placed on record, where she expresses her desire to put an end to the criminal prosecution initiated against the petitioner.

4.The learned Public Prosecutor after getting instructions has submitted that the statement of the party respondent has been recorded and she has stated in unequivocal terms that the settlement arrived at is genuine.

Crl.M.C.617/2017 3

5.I have considered the submissions.

6.It is evident from the materials produced that the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and have decided to part ways. The continuance of the criminal proceedings would only serve the purpose of causing unnecessary hardship to the parties.

7.It is by now settled that it is the duty of the courts to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. If the parties ponder over their faults and terminate their disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law, there is no reason why this Court should hesitate to exercise its powers under section 482 of the Code. Permitting such proceedings to continue would be nothing but an abuse of process of court. The dispute is clearly private and no public interest is involved.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. All proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now Crl.M.C.617/2017 4 pending as C.C.No.980 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Thamarassery, are quashed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top