SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vidhyadharan vs State Of Kerala on 3 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

MONDAY ,THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA,
1940

Crl.MC.No. 890 of 2014

CC 984/2012 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-
II,NEDUMANGAD

CRIME NO. 314/2012 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION ,
Thiruvananthapuram

PETITIONERS/A2 TO A4:
1 VIDHYADHARAN
AGED 69 YEARS
S/O.KRISHNAN, 5/367, PRASHANTH BHAVAN, KACHANI,
VATTIYOORKKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2 ANILKUMAR
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.VIDHYADHARAN, 5/367, PRASHANTH BHAVAN,
KACHANI, VATTIYOORKKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3 OMANA
AGED 65 YEARS
W/O.VIDHYADHARAN, 5/367, PRASHANTH BHAVAN,
KACHANI, VATTIYOORKKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED
RESPONDENT/STATE cw1:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
CR MC 890/2014 2

2 MINI.V.S
AGED 34 YEARS
W/O.AJIKUMAR, X/795, TPRA.NO.D-5, REVATHI
BHAVAN, PULLIKONAM, KACHANI, KARAKULAM.P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN CODE 695
564.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN CODE-695 564.

BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
03.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CR MC 890/2014 3

O R D E R

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure Code has been filed by Accused Nos.2 to 4 to quash

Annexure-D final report and all further proceedings in

C.C.No.984/2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate

Court-II, Nedumangad. Crime No.314/2012 was registered under

Sections 497, 498A, 120B 34 of the Indian penal Code against

the petitioners/accused 2 to 4 and the 1st accused.

2. The records would reveal that the 1 st accused had

married the de facto complainant who is the 2 nd respondent

herein as per the custom of their community on 15.9.1998 and

they resided together as husband and wife for sometime. Two

children were born out of their wedlock. Thereafter, their

relationship got strained and the parties have separated. Cases

have been filed by the de facto complainant/2 nd respondent

before the Family Court, Nedumangad and this case was also

filed by her against her husband and the petitioners. Petitioners
CR MC 890/2014 4

1 and 3 are the parents of the 1 st accused and 2nd

petitioner/accused No.3 is the brother-in-law of the de facto

complainant. While so, the marital dispute between the de facto

complainant and the 1st accused was settled out of court between

the parties and all the cases pending before the Family Court

were disposed of accepting the settlement arrangement entered

between the parties. Finally, their marriage has also been

dissolved by a decree of divorce. While so, these petitioners

approached this Court to quash the final report filed against them

contending that there is no material to proceed against them and

if the case is proceeded with, it will result as an abuse of process

of the court.

3. Now the learned counsel for the petitioners have

submitted that the entire dispute between the parties have

settled finally and the de facto complainant has absolutely no

complaints against the petitioners as well against the 1 st

accused.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

counsel for the de facto complainant and the learned Public

Prosecutor.

CR MC 890/2014 5

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed a report

incorporating the statement of the de facto complainant taken by

the investigating officer. The de facto complainant has specifically

stated before the investigating officer that she has no complaints

against the petitioners as well against the 1 st accused and she

has no objection in quashing the final report filed against all the

accused persons. Considering the entire facts involved in this

case, I find that this petition is only to be allowed as prayed for,

to prevent abuse of the process of the court and to secure the

ends of justice.

6. Hence, the final report filed in Crime No.314/2012 of

Aruvikkara Police Station (C.C.No.984/2012 on the file of the

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Nedumangad) against the

accused for the offences under Sections 497, 498A, 120B 34 of

IPC stands quashed as prayed for.

The Crl.M.C.is allowed.

Sd/-

ks SHIRCY V.

JUDGE
CR MC 890/2014 6

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE P1 ANNEXURE A- PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT

FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II,
NEDUMANGAD.

ANNEXURE P2 ANNEXURE B- PHOTOCOPY OF THE FIR IN
CRIME NO.314/2012 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE
STATION.

ANNEXURE P3 ANNEXURE C- PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER
DATED 23.10.2013 IN
CRL.M.A.NO.8373/2013 IN
CRL.M.C.NO.4783/2013 OF THIS HONORABLE
COURT.

ANNEXURE P4 ANNEXURE D- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL
REPORT IN C.C.NO.984/2012 ON THE FILE
OF THE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT-II, NEDUMANGAD.

ANNEXURE P5 E Affidavit executed by the 2nd respondent

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh