Nikhil Kumar.P vs State Of Kerala on 25 May, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/7TH ASHADHA, 1939

Crl.MC.No. 4257 of 2017 ()
—————————
CC 2449/2016 of J.M.F.C.,IRINJALAKUDA
CRIME NO. 1322/2016 OF PUDUKKAD POLICE STATION, TRISSUR

PETITIONER(S):
————-
1. NIKHIL KUMAR.P.,
S/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR, PANANGATTIL HOUSE,
THALIKULAM P.O., THALIKULAM VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.

2. NIRMALA,
AGED 68 YEARS, W/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR,
PANANGATTIL HOUSE, THALIKULAM P.O.,
THALIKULAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

3. NITHISH KUMAR,
AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN NAIR,
PANANGATTIL HOUSE, THALIKULAM P.O.,
THALIKULAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SMT.P.K.PRIYA

RESPONDENT(S):
————–
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
REPRESENTING S.I. OF POLICE,
PUTHUKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

2. RADHIKA,
AGED 28 YEARS, D/O.VENU,
PARAPURATH HOUSE, KALLOOR P.O.,
ALAGAPPAN NAGAR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680317.

R2 BY ADV. SMT.M.S.LETHA
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. E.C. BINEESH

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 4257 of 2017 ()
—————————

APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)’ EXHIBITS
———————–

ANNEXURE A1- TRUE COPY OF THE FIR AND FINAL
REPORT IN CRIME NO.1322/2016 OF PUTHUKKAD
POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2- TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
DATED 25/05/2017.

RESPONDENT(S)’ EXHIBITS
———————–

/TRUE COPY/

P.S. TO JUDGE

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

————————————————-
Crl.M.C. No. 4257 of 2017
————————————————-

Dated this the 28th day of June, 2017

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused in C.C. No. 2449 of

2016 on the files of the court below. The offences alleged

READ  Samir Saha-vs-Kalyani Saha And Anr. on 1 December, 1992

are offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC.

2. Heard.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for

the parties and the learned Public Prosecutor that the

matter has been settled between the parties and presently,

the 2nd respondent is residing with the first petitioner

under one roof as husband and wife.

4. The 2nd respondent, who is the de facto

complainant, filed affidavit stating that the matter has been

settled between the parties and she is presently residing

-2-

Crl.M.C. No. 4257 of 2017

with her husband who is the first petitioner, under one roof.

The above dispute arose out of family relationship.

Therefore, since the matter has been settled between the

parties and the parties are residing together, I am of the

view that quashing the said offences would secure the ends

of justice. For the said reason, I am inclined to quash

Annexure-A1 final report and further proceedings against

the petitioners in C.C. No. 2449 of 2016 on the files of the

court below, in exercise of the inherent power under

Section 482 Cr.P.C., to meet the ends of justice and

accordingly, I order so.

In the result, this Crl. M.C. Stands allowed.

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE.

ani/

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *