SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

P.Abhilash vs State Of Kerala on 7 January, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

TUESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 17TH POUSHA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.38 OF 2020(D)

CRIME NO.664/2019 OF ARTHUNGAL POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
P.ABHILASH
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O. BHASKARAN,K.P.HOUSE,
THAVALAPPARA,
PARASSINIKKADAVU.P.O,KANNUR,PIN-670563.

BY ADVS.
SRI.SIJU KAMALASANAN
SRI.S.ABHILASH
SMT.S.SEETHA
SMT.ANJANA KANNATH

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031.

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
ARTHUNGAL POLICE STATION,ALAPPUZHA
DISTRICT,PIN-688530.

3 SEENA PAUL
D/O.PAUL,AGED 33 YEARS
KARAKKATTU VEEDU,CHETHI.P.O,
MARARIKULAM,ARTHUNGAL,ALAPPUZHA,
PIN-688530.

R3 BY ADV. A.MUHAMMED RAFI
R1 R2 BY SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No.38 of 2020 2

ORDER

This is a proceedings instituted under Section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing Annexure – I first

information report in crime No.664 of 2019 of Arthungal Police

Station.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused in the said

case. The case was instituted at the instance of the third

respondent for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 417

and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is seen that the third respondent has settled her

disputes with the petitioner, and an affidavit to that effect has

been filed as Annexure – 5.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Public Prosecutor as also the learned counsel for the

third respondent.

5. The learned counsel for the third respondent
Crl.M.C. No.38 of 2020 3

affirmed that Annexure – 5 affidavit is one sworn to by the third

respondent and submitted that the third respondent has no

objection in allowing the prayer of the petitioner.

6. In the light of the decision of the Apex Court in

Gian singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, I am of

the view that this is an appropriate case where this court has to

invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings against the

petitioner.

In the result, the Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure – I

first information report in crime No.664 of 2019 of Arthungal

Police Station and all further proceedings thereto are quashed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

DK
Crl.M.C. No.38 of 2020 4

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR ALONG WITH
FIS IN CRIME NO.664/2019 OF ARTHUNGAL
POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE 2 THE COPY OF REPORT DATED 20.7.2019
FILED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF
POLICE,ARTHUNGAL BEFORE THE JFMC-
II,CHERTHALA IN CRIME NO.664/2019

ANNEXURE A3 THE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND
THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
7.11.2019

ANNEXURE 4 THE COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT REGARDING PAYMENT OF
SETTLEMENT AMOUNT

ANNEXURE 5 THE AFFIDAVIT REGARDING SETTLEMENT
SWORN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON
7.12.2019.

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

DK

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation