IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1941
Crl.MC.No. 2029 of 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1053/2017 of JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, MATTANCHERY
CRIME NO. 1054/2016 OF Mattancherry Police Station , Ernakulam
KALA,AGED 28 YEARS
W/O. RAVI, C/O. CC 13/440A, CHULLICKAL,
BY ADV. SRI.V.S.MANSOOR
1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
H.NO. 131427, CHULLICKAL, KOCHI 5, ERNAKULAM (DIST)
SMT.PRIYA SHANAVAS, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R1,
SMT,M.A.SULFIA FOR R2
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
Crl.M.C.No. 2029 of 2019
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2019
The above Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under
the enabling provisions contained in Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. with the
“……. to quash Annexure B Final report and all further proceedings
pursuant to that against the petitioner, which is now pending as C.C.No.
1053 of 2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court,
2. Heard Sri.V.S.Mansoor, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, Smt. Priya Shanavas, learned Prosecutor appearing for R-1
State of Kerala and Smt.M.A.Sulfia, learned counsel appearing for
R-2 defacto complainant.
3. The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.2 in
the impugned Calendar Case, C.C.No.1053/2017 on the file of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Mattanchery, which has arisen
out of Anx.B final report/charge sheet filed in Anx.A Crime No.
1054/2016 of Mattanchery Police Station. The petitioner hails from
Andhra Pradesh and she (A-2) along with one Sajeeb (accused No.1)
have been arrayed as accused in the abovesaid criminal proceedings
which has been registered for offence under Sec.498A I.P.C. and
Crl.M.C.2029/19 – : 3 :-
Sec.4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is pointed out by the petitioner that
the only allegation raised against the petitioner in the impugned
criminal proceedings, which has been triggered on the basis of the
first information statement of the 2nd respondent defacto complainant
(who is the wife of A-1), is that A-1 (husband of R-2) is having extra
marital relationship with the petitioner (A-2) and there is no whisper
in Anx. A and Anx. B that the petitioner is had demanded any dowry
from the 2nd respondent or that she has committed any cruelty against
the petitioner, etc. The Police after investigation in Anx.A Crime No.
1054/2016 of Mattanchery Police Station has now submitted Anx.B
final report/charge sheet which has led to the institution of Calendar
Case, C.C.No.5053/2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class
Magistrate’s Court, Mattanchery.
4. There does not appear to be any serious dispute for the
2nd respondent that the only allegation raised against the petitioner is
that A-1 (husband of R-2) is having extra marital relationship with the
petitioner and that there are no further allegations therein that the
petitioner A-2 had demanded any dowry from the 2 nd respondent or
that she committed any cruelty against the 2nd respondent, etc.
5. It has been held by the Apex Court in decisions as in
Crl.M.C.2029/19 – : 4 :-
Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal v. State of Gujarat [(2013) 10
SCC 48] that mere fact that the husband developed some intimacy
with another women during subsistence of the marriage and failed to
discharge his marital obligations would not amount to cruelty as
understood in Sec. 498 of the I.P.C. Further it has also been held by
the Apex Court in Ghusabhai Rias Angbhai Chorasiya v.
State of Gujarat [(2015) 11 SCC 753], that extra marital
relationship of the accused husband would not amount to cruelty as
understood in Sec.498 A of the I.P.C. Going by the stand of the
parties, it is seen that, apart from the allegation of extra marital
relationship, no other serious allegations have been raised against the
petitioner (A-2), who hails from Andhra Pradesh.
6. In the light of these aspects, further continuance of the
impugned criminal proceedings would be abuse of the process of the
court and the petitioner need not be unnecessarily forced to face the
ordeal of the trial and this Court could exercise its extra ordinary
discretionary inherent powers conferred on this Court under Sec. 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, it is ordered that the
impugned Anx.B final report/charge filed in Anx.A Crime No.
1054/2016 of the Mattanchery Police Station, which has now led to
Crl.M.C.2029/19 – : 5 :-
the institution of Calendar Case, C.C.No. 1053/2017 on the file of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Mattanchery, to the limited
extent it affects the petitioner herein (A-2) will stand quashed. It is
made clear that findings and orders in this judgment will not in any
manner affect the impugned criminal proceedings as far as the other
accused are concerned.
The petitioner may produce certified copies of this order before
the investigating officer concerned and before the court below
concerned for necessary information.
With these observations and directions, the above Criminal
Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.
sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Crl.M.C.2029/19 – : 6 :-
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR AND FIS IN CRIME NO.
1054/2016 OF MATTANCHERY POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE B A CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN C.C
1053/2017 ON THE FILES OF JFCM, MATTANCHERY