High Court of Kerala quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC filed against accused, holding that an amicable settlement of matrimonial disputes between the husband and wife negates the interest of justice in continuing the case.
C.C.No.700/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ambalapuzha is quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
TUESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2009 / 27TH SRAVANA 1931
Crl.MC.No. 2524 of 2009(A)
-----------------------------------CC.700/2008 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, AMABALAPUZHA (CRIME NO.394/2006 OF AMBALAPUZHA POLICE STATION)
PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED
-------------------------------------
1. NISSAMUDHIN, S/O.UMMARKUTTY, AGED 43 YEARS, KANDATHIL HOUSE, THOTTAPPALLY KARA, WARD NO.10, PURAKKAD PANCHAYATH.
2. SAINABA, W/O.MUHAMMEDKUTTY, PARATHURUTH HOUSE, WEST OF NARAKATHARA JUNCTION, KUMARAPURAM PANCHAYATH, HARIPPAD.
3. NABEESATH, W/O.RASHEED, THOTTUNKALPURAYIDAM, VATTAPPALLY ROAD, SAKKARIA WARD, ALAPPUZHA MUNICIPALITY.
4. AABIDA, W/O.SHAMSUDHIN, KOCHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR VELLANA JUNCTION, VIYYAPURAM PANCHAYATH.
5. SUBAIDA, W/O.ABDUL AZEES, PAZHAVACHALIL HOUSE, CHINGOLI MURI, CHINGOLI PANCHAYATH, KARTHIKAPPALLY.
BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO
SMT.C.M.CHARISHMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK SRI.K.S.SALEESH
RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT AND DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTING CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBALAPUZHA POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. SAJITHA, D/O.AHAMMED KOYA, AGED 30 YEARS, PADAVUPURACKAL HOUSE, KURAVANTHODE WEST, PUNNAPRA PANCHAYATH.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR.
ADV. SRI.PMM.NAJEEB KHAN FOR R2
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
Crl.M.C.No.2524 of 2009
ORDER
Petitioners are the accused and second respondent, the defacto complainant in C.C.No.700/2008 on the file
of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ambalapuzha. Prosecution case is that petitioners committed offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Second respondent is the wife of the first petitioner. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that there was an amicable settlement of all the disputes between the petitioners and second respondent. It is contended that O.P.No. 210/2007 filed by the second respondent before Family Court, Alappuzha for recovery of money and ornaments was also disposed accepting the settlement and in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to proceed with the case.
CRMC 2524/09 2
joint petition stating that there was an amicable settlement of all disputes between them and in such circumstances, the case is to be quashed.
Apex Court in B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675), when there is an amicable settlement of the matrimonial dispute, it is not in the interest of
justice to proceed with the case further.
Petition is allowed. C.C.No.700/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ambalapuzha is quashed.
18th August, 2009 tkv
(M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC should be quashed due to amicable settlement between the accused and the complainant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S.Joshi v. State of HaryanaRelied on¶32
B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 4 SCC 675) · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Nissamudhin
Sainaba
Nabeesath
Aabida
Subaida
The State of Kerala
M.Sasidharan Nambiar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
