IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 21ST KARTHIKA, 1941
Crl.MC.No.6938 OF 2019(F)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1831/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
OF FIRST CLASS -I, PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER:
ANOOP KUMAR,
AGED 36 YEARS
AMBADIYIL, PATHIRICKAL P,
PATHANAPURAM P.O.,
PATHANAPURAM VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
H. SOMARAJAN PILLAI, AMBADIYIL,
PATHIRICKAL, P.O.PATHANAPURAM,
PATHANAPURAM VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-689 695.
BY ADVS.
SRI.C.R.REGHUNATHAN
SRI.B.HARRYLAL
SMT.U.RESHMA GOPAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 REMYA R.
AGED 31 YEARS
D/O RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
KALYANIYIL, KOODAL P.O.
KOODAL VILLAGE, KONNI TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689 693.
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682 031.
SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.6938 OF 2019(F)
2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
Crl.M.C No.6938 of 2019
Dated this the 12th day of November, 2019
ORDER
The case projected in this Crl.M.C filed under Sec.482 of the
Cr.P.C are as follows:
The petitioner is highly aggrieved by the pendency of
C.C.No.1831/2015 on the files of JFCM Court-1, Pathanamthitta.
Annexure-P1 complaint was originally filed by 1 st respondent alleging
offence under Secs.498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the
petitioner, his father, mother and brother. Subsequent to Annexure-P2
sworn statement given by the 1st respondent, the learned Magistrate
deleted the name of the petitioner’s father, mother and brother from
the list of accused. But the learned Magistrate took cognizance against
the petitioner alone for the offence under Sec.323 of the IPC. The
disputes between the petitioner and the 1st respondent was settled
through the involvement of relatives and thereafter the petitioner and
the 1st respondent moved Annexure-P3 joint divorce proceedings and
Crl.MC.No.6938 OF 2019(F)
3
obtained Annexure-P4 judgment dated 30.04.2016. Inspite of earlier
assurances, the 1st respondent did not withdrawn Annexure-P1
complaint which she has filed only to pressurize and harass the
petitioner and his family members by making false allegations and
averments. It is in the light of these averments and contentions, the
petitioner has filed the instant Crl.M.C with the following prayers:
“i. Call for the records leading up to CC 1831/2015 on the files
of JFCM Court-1, Pathanamthitta and quash the same.
ii. Grant such other reliefs including interim orders that this
Hon’ble Court may find just, proper and necessary in the
interest of justice.”
2. Heard Sri.C.R.Reghunathan, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner (accused) and Sri.Santhosh Peter, learned Public
Prosecutor appearing for R-2 State of Kerala. Though R-1 (de facto
complainant) has been duly served, there is no appearance for that
party. It appears that the impugned criminal proceedings have arisen
mainly out of matrimonial disputes between the petitioner herein and
R-1 herein, who are spouses. Later, both of them have decided to
resolve their entire disputes and have already dissolved the marital
relationship through the Family Court proceedings. The disputes have
been resolved between the abovesaid parties as per Annexure-P3
Crl.MC.No.6938 OF 2019(F)
4
compromise deed entered into by them before the Family Court,
Pathanamthitta and clause.8 thereof given on internal page No.3 of
Annexure-P3 provides that both sides are agreed that the entire
proceedings pending between them will be duly terminated, etc. It is
pointed out that on the basis of Annexure-P3 compromise deed, the
petitioner has fulfilled his part and has agreed for divorce on mutual
consent, which has resulted in Annexure-P4 judgment and decree of
the Family Court, Pathanamthitta in dissolving the marital
relationship. But thereafter, the 1st respondent is not taking any
interest to co-operate with the petitioner for quashment of the present
impugned criminal proceedings. This Court has called for a report of
the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Pathanamthitta, who is
dealing with the instant case and it is stated in the said report of the
learned Magistrate that though the original offences alleged in the
private criminal complaint filed as CMP.No.887/2015 was for offences
under Sec.498A and 34 of the IPC. Later, the learned Magistrate has
taken cognizance only for the offence as per Sec.323 of the IPC. The
offence as per Sec.323 of the IPC is a bailable offence and is a
non-cognizable one. It will sheer wastage of the precious time and
Crl.MC.No.6938 OF 2019(F)
5
resources of the police machinery, prosecution agency and the criminal
trial court to spend its energies in such a case, wherein the parties have
buried the hatchet long ago and have resolved the disputes and the
spouses have also parted their ways.
3. Accordingly, in the interest of justice it is ordered that
further proceedings in C.C.No.1831/2015 on the file of the Judicial
First Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Pathanamthitta initiated against the
petitioner/accused and all further proceedings arising therefrom, will
stand quashed.
4. The petitioner will produce certified copies of this order to
the Investigating Officer concerned and the competent court below
concerned. Office of Advocate General will forward a copy of this order
to the Investigating Officer concerned, for necessary information.
With these observations and directions, the above Criminal
Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
vgd
Crl.MC.No.6938 OF 2019(F)
6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE P1 TRUE COPY OF CC 1831/2015
ANNEXURE P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SWORN STATEMENT GIVEN
BY 1ST RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE SWORN STATEMENT OF
WITNESS PRASANNA KUMAR
ANNEXURE P2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE SWORN STATEMENT OF
ANOTHER WITNESS BY NAME BALAN UNNITHAN
ANNEXURE P3 TRUE COPY OF OP (HMA) 680/2015 BEFORE
HON’BLE FAMILY COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
ANNEXURE P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP (HMA)
680/2015 OF HON’BLE FAMILY COURT,
PATHANAMTHITTA
ANNEXURE P5 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY
EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF
HIS FATHER