SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sunildas vs State Of Kerala on 13 January, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020 / 23RD POUSHA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.192 OF 2020(D)

PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.1114 OF 2018 ON THE FILES OF
ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

CRIME NO.691/2017 OF POOJAPURA POLICE STATION

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

SUNILDAS,
OMAR, CHERUKARA ROAD,
POOJAPURA, THIRUMALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695004.

BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI

RESPONDENTS/STATE DE FACTO COMPLAINANT :-

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
POOJAPURA POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKUALM – 682031.

2 NITHYA,
T.C 17/995, RENJINI,
VIDYADHIRAJA NAGAR, POOJAPURA,
THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695014.

R2 BY ADV. SHAJIN S.HAMEED
R1 BY SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.01.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.192 of 2020 2

ORDER

This is a proceedings under Section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure for quashing Annexure – A Final Report

pending trial before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

Court, Thiruvananthapuram in C.C.No.1114 of 2018.

2. The petitioner is the accused in the said case.

The case was one registered under Sections 498A, 294(b) and

323 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 31 of the Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

3. It is stated that the petitioner and the de facto

complainant of the crime have amicably settled the disputes

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

the records.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Public Prosecutor as also the learned counsel for the

de facto complainant.

5. In the light of the decision of the Apex Court in
Crl.M.C.No.192 of 2020 3

Gian singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, insofar as

the offences alleged against the petitioner are only offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 294(b) and 323 of the Indian

Penal Code and Section 31 of the Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act, 2005, 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.

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

Final Report pending trial before the Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram in C.C.No.1114 of 2018

and all further proceedings thereto are quashed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

DK
Crl.M.C.No.192 of 2020 4

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME
NO.691/2017 OF POOJAPURA POLICE
STATION.

ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF

AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN
CRL.M.C.NO.994/2017.

ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE D CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.691/2017 OF POOJAPURA POLICE
STATION.

RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES: 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