SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rajesh Panicker vs The State Of Kerala on 12 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 23RD MAGHA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.1253 OF 2020(F)

CC 924/2013 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, KOLLAM

CRIME NO.1581/2013 OF Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3 :

1 RAJESH PANICKER,
AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS PANICKER,
RESIDING AT RAJESH BHAVAN,
THRIPPALAZHIKOM MURI, KAREEPRA VILLAGE,
KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691509.

2 THOMAS PANICKER,
AGED 72 YEARS, S/O.MATHAI, RESIDING AT RAJESH BHAVAN,
THRIPPALAZHIKOM MURI, KAREEPRA VILLAGE,
KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691509.

3 THANKAMMA THOMAS,
AGED 66 YEARS, W/O.THOMAS PANICKER,
RESIDING AT RAJESH BHAVAN, THRIPPALAZHIKOM MURI,
KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-691509.

BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJESH(PULLIKADA)

RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2 BIJIL T CHACKO,
AGED 40 YEARS,
W/O.RAJESH PANICKER,
RESIDING AT THOOMBUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,
KUREEPALLY, ALUMMUDU P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-691577.

R2 BY ADV. V.BEENA
R1 BY SRI.AMJAD ALI SR.PP

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.1253 OF 2020(F)
2

ORDER

This is a proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure for quashing Annexure-A2 Final Report pending

trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrat Court-II, Kollam in

C.C.No.924 of 2013.

2. The petitioners are the accused in the said case.

The case was one registered under Sections 323, 456, 498A and

34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is seen that the petitioners and the de facto

complainant of the crime have amicably settled the disputes. An

affidavit sworn to by the de facto complainant is part of the

records.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the

learned Public Prosecutor as also the learned counsel for the de

facto complainant.

5. It is seen that the dispute arose on account of the

matrimonial discord between the de facto complainant and her

husband, the first accused. Though the matter is settled between

the parties, I have examined the accusation in the case and found

that this is a matter that could be settled and closed in the light of
Crl.MC.No.1253 OF 2020(F)
3

the decisions of the Apex Court in Jitendra Raghuvanshi v.

Babita Raghuvanshi, (2013) 4 SCC 58 and Gian singh v. State

of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, invoking the jurisdiction under

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In the result, the Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure – A2

Final Report pending trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrat

Court-II, Kollam in C.C.No.924 of 2013 and all further proceedings

thereto are quashed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR,
rkj JUDGE
Crl.MC.No.1253 OF 2020(F)
4

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR NO.1581/13 OF
KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
AND CONNECTED DOCUMENTS IN CRIME

NO.1581/13 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT

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