IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANNIE JOHN
TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MAY 2019 / 24TH VAISAKHA, 1941
Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2019
CRIME NO. 560/2018 OF PARIYARAM POLICE STATION , Kannur
PETITIONER:
DR.SHAMENON.K.C @ SHA MENON @ SHYAMKUMAR
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O. BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, KIZHUVATT CHALAPPURATH
HOUSE, SHA MANDIRAM, NEAR BALAVADI ROAD, CHERUPUZHA
AMSAM, CHERUPUZHA, KANNUR DISTRICT – 670 511.
BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, COCHIN – 31.
2 BINDU M. RAVI
D/O. RAVI, MULLUVATH (H), CHERUTHAZHAM, KANNUR
DISTRICT – 670 503.
SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA, PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2019
2
O R D E R
This Criminal M.C No. 3202/2019 was filed in order to quash
the FIR Crime File 560/2018 of Pariyaram Police Station. The
petitioner is the accused in crime No. 560/2018 of Pariyaram
Police Station. The alleged offences against the petitioner is
that, under Section 403, Section406, Section420 and Section376 of IPC. The petitioner
and defacto complainant are living together as husband and wife
for the last 17 years and in the said matrimonial life, petitioner
had one male child who is studying in the 10 th standard. Prior to
that, defacto complainant was married to one Mr. Jose Varghese.
Out of this wedlock, defacto complainant had one female child
also; she is studying for B.Sc. Nursing. At the time of starting
their relation, both parties were married and defacto
complainant, knowing the fact that the petitioner was married
and father of two children and with the consent, both of them
started living together and had a consent on the part of the
respondent to lead a sexual life. According to the petitioner,
Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2019
3
there is no question of rape and Section 376 will not be
applicable in this case. When the matter was taken up for
hearing, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that the matter has
been settled between the parties and the defacto complainant,
the 2nd respondent herein has filed a strong statement wherein
the petitioner has affirmed that there are some disputes between
them and accordingly she had filed a criminal case against him
according to Section 498A of IPC. During the said period,
relationship with him was strained. At that time, the brother-in-
law of the petitioner approached her and instigated her to file
the present complaint against the petitioner. It was under his
compulsion the above case was happened to be filed against the
petitioner. After that, she has affirmed that the petitioner was
maintaining her and her son for the past years and she has no
grievances against him regarding any of the offences or
allegations in the complaint on which the above FIR was
registered.
Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2019
4
2. The sale proceedings of 80 cents of property was
received by her and petitioner never misappropriated the same
and further she has reiterated that the petitioner has never
cheated her and obtained her consent for living together.
Petitioner is still maintaining herself and her child and any
proceedings against the petitioner in connection with the above
case will adversely affect their future. The disputes between
them is settled and she has no more grievances in the matter and
she does not want to prosecute the case further. In this
connection, there was a direction to the Prosecutor to take up
some instructions and the Prosecutor has reported that the matter
has been settled between the parties and due to some financial
problems, the complaint was launched against the petitioner. And
now the entire matter has been settled between them and
Prosecutor has also produced a statement of the victim, wherein
victim has stated that the matter has been settled between the
parties and she does not want to proceed with the case.
Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2019
5
3. After hearing both sides, and on production of
statement as well as the report and the affidavit of the defacto
complainant, I find that there are no disputes at present between
them; therefore there is no meaning in proceeding with this case
further.
Therefore I am hereby inclined to allow the application for
quashing the FIR No. 560/2018 of Pariyaram Police Station.
Accordingly this Criminal M.C is allowed and the
FIR No. 560/2018 is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
ANNIE JOHN
Nsd JUDGE
//true copy//
PA to Judge
Crl.MC.No. 3202 of 2019
6
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 THE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT.
ANNEXURE A2 THE COPY OF THE BANK RECEIPT.
ANNEXURE A3 THE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JFCM PAYYANNUR.
ANNEXURE A4 THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CR.M.C. /19.
ANNEXURE A5 THE COPY OF THE CR. M.C.795/2019.
ANNEXURE A6 THE AFFIDAVITS OF RESPONDENT NO. 2