The petitioners sought quashing of criminal proceedings instituted under Section 498A IPC regarding matrimonial disputes. The court resolved that, in view of the settlement between the parties, the prosecution was avoidable. Quashing proceedings are allowed.
The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed and all proceedings in C.C.No. 259/2007 stand quashed. (V.R.H..
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JANUARY 2008 / 12TH POUSHA 1929
Crl.MC.No. 7 of 2008()
---------------------C.C. NO. 259 OF 2007 ON THE FILE OF THE J.F.C.M.II, HOSDURG
PETITIONER: DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & ACCUSED:
BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SOHAN
RESPONDENTS: STATE:
STATE OF KERALA, SHO, BAKEL POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.85/2007) REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. BREEZE
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.M.C. No. 7 of 2008**
*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 02-01-2008**
ORDER
The petitioners are the defacto complainant and accused in C.C.No. 259 of 2007 on the file of J.F.C.M - II, Hosdurg, Kasaragod for an offence punishable under Section 498A IPC.
Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed and all proceedings in C.C.No. 259/2007 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Hosdurg, Kasaragod shall stand quashed.
(V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE)
ani
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007
V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE)
ani.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash proceedings under Section 498A IPC after settlement between marital partners.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi vs. State of HaryanaRelied on¶23
AIR 2003 SC 1386 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ramla and Abdul Hameed
State of Kerala
V. Ramkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
V. Ramkumar
Parties & counsel
