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.1222 OF 2020(C)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 498/2019 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOZHIKODE
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED PERSONS 1 TO 4:
1 RANJITH, AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.PRAKASAN, KAKKADATH HOUSE,
NAGATHINGALPARAMBU, ARTS COLLEGE P.O.,
MEENCHANTHA, PANNIYANKARA,
KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 018.
2 REEJA, AGED 50 YEARS
W/O.PRAKASAN, KAKKADATH HOUSE,
NAGATHINGALPARAMBU, ARTS COLLEGE P.O.,
MEENCHANTHA, PANNIYANKARA,
KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 018.
3 CHITHRA, AGED 28 YEARS
W/O.JITHU, KAKKADATH HOUSE,
NAGATHINGALPARAMBU, ARTS COLLEGE P.O.,
MEENCHANTHA, PANNIYANKARA,
KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 018.
4 JITHU.K., AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.PRAKASAN, KAKKADATH HOUSE,
NAGATHINGALPARAMBU, ARTS COLLEGE P.O.,
MEENCHANTHA, PANNIYANKARA, KOZHIKODE,
PIN-673 018.
BY ADV. SRI.E.NARAYANAN
RESPONDENTS/THE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT STATE:
1 ATHIRA.N.P., AGED 20 YEARS
D/O.NITHYANANDAN, NARAYANEEYAM, EDOLIMEETHAL,
KOMMERI P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 007.
Crl.M.C. No. 1222 of 2020
..2..
2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
BY SR. PP SRI.SANTHOSH PETER
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No. 1222 of 2020
..3..
Crl.M.C. No. 1222 of 2020
———————————-
ORDER
This is a proceedings under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure for quashing Annexure A1 Final Report
pending trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I,
Kozhikode in C.C.No.498 of 2019.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 4 in the
said case. The case was one registered under Sections 498A
and 406 read with Section 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
Crl.M.C. No. 1222 of 2020
..4..
case and found that this is a matter that could be settled and
closed in the light of 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
A1 Final Report pending trial before the Judicial First Class
Magistrate Court-I, Kozhikode in C.C.No.498 of 2019 and all
further proceedings thereto are quashed.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR
JUDGE
ds 13.02.2020
Crl.M.C. No. 1222 of 2020
..5..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT FILED
BY THE PANNIYANKARA POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A2 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.