High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 10 KL CK 0157

Valsala Nisha @ Nisha vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 30 October 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.Babu, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 4461 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 399 words

K.Babu, J.

1.

The prayers in the Cr.M.C. are as follows;

“i. Quash the terms of Compromise in Annexure A5 judgment in M.C.No.7/2020 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Pathanamthitta District dated 03.01.2021.

And

ii. Such other reliefs which are deemed fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case.”

2.

The petitioner is respondent in M.C.No.07/2020, a petition under the relevant provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 [for short the DV Act], on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta. The petitioner and respondent No.2 settled their entire disputes and filed compromise in all pending cases. After accepting the compromise the learned Magistrate passed an order to the effect that the petitioner herein is restrained from making any disturbance to the peaceful living of respondent No.2 in future.

3.

Respondent  No.2  entered  appearance  through  a counsel. An affidavit sworn to by her has also been placed before the court. In the affidavit respondent No.2 stated that in view of the settlement entered into between the parties she never intended to obtain an order as stated above. It is further submitted that she has no further grievances against the petitioner and the order passed by the learned Magistrate in M.C.No.07/2020 will cause difficulty to them.

4.

Heard both sides.

5.

The learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the order passed by the learned Magistrate after accepting the compromise would affect the sanctity of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the matter was enquired into through the SHO who investigated the complaint filed by respondent No.2 alleging an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, and it was reported that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled.

7.

In the instant case, the dispute is purely personal in nature. There is nothing to show that public interest will be compromised by quashing the order passed in MC. No.07/2020 by the jurisdictional Magistrate. The proceedings in Crime No.764 of 2018 of Konni Police Station registered based on the complaint filed by respondent No.2 has been quashed by this Court in Crl.M.C.4336 of 2022, relying on the settlement arrived at between the parties.

Resultantly, the Crl.M.C.is allowed. The order in MC No.07/2020 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Pathanamthitta (Annexure-V) stands quashed.