The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioners involving cheating, criminal force, and dowry harassment. The quashing was based on a mediated settlement reached between the parties during civil suit proceedings.
The criminal proceedings in CC.No.1218/2015 as against the petitioners stand 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 SUNIL THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 200 of 2018
PENDING AS C 1218/2015 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, VARKALA
CRIME NO. 64/2015 OF AIROOR POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 TO 4
BY ADV.SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE, DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1. THE STATE OF KERALA
2. K. SURENDRA BABU,
3. DIVYA S.BABU, AGED 28 YEARS, D/O. K. SURENDRA BABU, RESIDING AT CHATHAYAM VEEDU, MARAKKADA JUNCTION, EDAVA P.O., VENKULAM, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 311.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-07-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 200 of 2018 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.07.2017 IN
ANNEXURE A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE MEDIATION AGREEMENT ENTERED BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS HEREIN AND DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT/2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN IN
O.S.NO. 123 ON THE FILES OF LEARNED MUNSIFF'S COURT, VARKALA.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL
R.AV
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
Crl.M.C.No.200 of 2018
Dated this the 19th day of July, 2018
O R D E R
The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 4, in CC.No.1218/2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Varkala, arising from Crime No.64/2015 of Aiyroor Police Station for offences punishable under sections 420 and 354 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Crl.M.C.No.200 of 2018
2
stated to have resolved their disputes. It is also seen that a civil suit was also filed. Pending the civil suit, matter was referred for a mediation and resolution was arrived at. Recording the settlement in mediation, the suit was closed evidenced by Annexure-A2 order. In the light of the settlement, parties claimed for quashing the proceedings. Notice was issued to the respondents Nos.2 and 3, who have not chosen to appear and to contest the proceedings. It is seen from Annexure-A3 at clause (5) that, as a condition for settling the disputes, parties resolved to give a quietus to CC.No.1218/2015 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Varkala. The learned Public prosecutor on instructions submitted that the settlement has been reported to the investigating agency and the parties have no further grievance. Having considered this, I am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C and to quash the entire criminal proceedings.
Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings in
Crl.M.C.No.200 of 2018
3
CC.No.1218/2015 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Varkala, arising from Crime No.64/2015 of Aiyroor Police Station as against the petitioners herein stand quashed.
Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE
R.AV
//True Copy//
PA to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under IPC Sections 420,354,34 read with Dowry Prohibition Act Section 3 can be quashed due to a mediated settlement.
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal case in view of the settlement.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rahul Renjan
Renjan Pillai
K. Rohini Renjan
Remya Renjan
State of Kerala
K. Surendra Babu
Sunil Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
