IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/9TH PHALGUNA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 1120 of 2016 ()
—————————
CRIME NO. 1203/2012 OF KALADY POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
1. DEEPAK VARGHESE, AGED 31 YEARS,
S/O.VARGHESE, RESIDING AT PADINAREPURAKKAL,
VELLARAPPALLY P.O., SREEMOOLA NAGARAM,
ALUVA, ERNAKULAM-683 580.
2. ALPHONSA VARGHESE
W/O.P.G.VARGHESE, PADINAREPURAKKAL,
VELLARAPPALLY CHOVVARA P.O., SREEMOOLA NAGARAM, ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM-683 580.
3. P.G.VARGHESE
S/O.GEORGE, PADINAREPURAKKAL,
VELLARAPPALLY CHOVVARA P.O., SREEMOOLA NAGARAM,
ALUVA, ERNAKULAM-683 580.
4. ROOPAK VARGHESE
S/O.P.G.VARGHESE, PADINAREPURAKKAL,
VELLARAPPALLY CHOVVARA P.O.,
SREEMOOLANAGARAM, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM-683 580.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.JAYASANKAR
SRI.MANU GOVIND
SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SI OF POLICE, KALADY POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2. JESNA, AGED 24 YEARS,
D/O.THOMMANA JOSE, MOTHIRAKUNI DESOM, PARIYAROM VILLAGE,
MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR-680 683.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SREEKANTH
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1120 of 2016 ()
—————————
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)’ ANNEXURES
———————–
ANNEXURE-A. TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1203/2012 REGISTERED BY
THE KALADY POLICE
ANNEXURE-A2. THE AFFIDAVIT SOLEMNLY AFFIRMED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE A3: FIR IN CRIME NO.1203/12 OF KALADY POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A4: FINAL REPORT IN C.C. 1024/2015 ON THE FILES OF THE
JFCM, PERUMBAVOOR.
RESPONDENTS)’ ANNEXURES: NIL
———————–
TRUE COPY
P.A. TO JUDGE.
kp
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Crl.M.C. No. 1120 of 2016
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Dated 28th February, 2017
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
ORDER
The petitioners are accused in C.C.No.1024 of 2015 on
the files of the court below. The respondent No.2 is the de
facto complainant. The offence alleged is the offence under
Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and the learned
Public Prosecutor.
3. Annexure A2 affidavit has been filed by the 2nd
respondent stating that the matter has been settled and
hence she has no further grievance against the petitioners.
The 1st petitioner is the husband and other petitioners are
the in-laws of the 2nd respondent.
4. Since the dispute in this case arose out of family
relationship, I am of the view that it is only just and proper
to quash Annexure A4 final report and further proceedings
Crl.M.C. No.1120 of 2016 -2-
in C.C.No.1024 of 2015 on the files of the court below to
meet the ends of justice. Accordingly I order so.
In the result, this Crl.M.C stands allowed.
Sd/-
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR,
JUDGE
kp/28.02.17
