Crime No. 236/2015 Of Kondotty … vs Sasi on 5 April, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/8TH ASHADHA, 1939

Crl.MC.No. 3133 of 2017 ()
—————————
CRIME NO. 236/2015 OF KONDOTTY POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
———————
1.SASI
S/O. SREEDHARAN,
KONJALATH VEEDU, PUTHUKKODE P.O.,
PERINGAVU, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

2. SATHYAN,
S/O. SREEDHARAN,
KONJALATH VEEDU, PUTHUKKODE P.O.,
PERINGAVU, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

3. SREEDHARAN,
S/O. NAGAN,
KONJALATH VEEDU, PUTHUKKODE P.O.,
PERINGAVU, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
——————————————

1. THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI – 682 031 – THROUGH
THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

2. ASARANI,
W/O. SASI
UNUKKANCHERYTHAZHAM HOUSE,
KUTTIKATTOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE TALUK,
KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT, PIN : 673 008.

R2 BY ADV. SMT.K.NISHA
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.K. PRASAD

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 29-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 3133 of 2017 ()
—————————

APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)’ EXHIBITS
———————–

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME NO.
236/2015 OF THE KONDOTTY POLICE STATION,
MALAPPURAM DITRICT DT. 7.9.2016.

ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT
SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
5.4.2017.

RESPONDENT(S)’ EXHIBITS
———————–

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

————————————————-
Crl.M.C. No. 3133 of 2017
————————————————-

Dated this the 29th day of June, 2017

ORDER

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 236

of 2015 of Kondotty Police Station, registered for the

offences under Sections 323, 324, 354 and 498A read with

Section 34 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 the second

respondent is presently residing with the first petitioner,

who is her husband, under one roof. The second

respondent filed affidavit stating that the matter has been

settled between the parties and hence, she has no further

grievance against the petitioners. The above dispute arose

-2-

Crl.M.C. No. 3133 of 2017

out of matrimonial relationship. Therefore, since the

matter has been settled between the parties, I am inclined

to quash Annexure -A FIR and further proceedings against

the petitioners in Crime No. 236 of 2015 of Kondotty

Police Station, 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 *