Allowed

Suraj Abraham v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Mar 2008Crl.MC/368/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash a complaint and consequential proceedings for offences under Sections 498A read with 34 IPC, relying on the precedent that Section 482 Cr.P.C permits termination of prosecution where the matter has been settled.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed and C.C.No.322/2005 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva, shall stand quashed.

Suraj Abraham Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 368 of 2008()

¶6

-----------------------CC.322/2005 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, ALUVA

¶7

PETITIONER: ACCUSED:

¶8

¶9

SURAJ ABRAHAM, S/O. M.A. ITTIAVIRAH, AGED 35 YEARS, R/AT MALIVIL HOUSE, ROCKWELL ROAD, PALLILAMKARA, HMT COLONY P.O., KALAMASSERY-683503, TRIKKAKARA VILLAGE.

BY ADV. SRI.TOM JOSE

RESPONDENTS:

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, KALAMASSERY P.O., ERNAKULAM.

¶15

*ADDL.3

¶16

MERCY JOHN, D/O.ULAHANNAN AGED 30 YEARS, PANTHAPPATHIL HOUSE, NEDUMKANDAM KARA, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, KALKOONTHAL VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 553.

¶17

ADDL.R3 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11.2.08 IN CRL.M.A.NO.739/2008

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶21

= = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.368 of 2008

¶22

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7^th day of March, 2008

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner, who is the husband of the de facto complainant and accused in C.C.No.322 of 2005 pending before the J.F.C.M-II, Aluva for offences punishable under Sections 498A read with 34 IPC, seeks to quash the complaint, as well as the consequential proceedings on the ground that the claims of the de facto complainant- Mercy John have been settled as per Annexure C undertaking executed by her. Even though the de facto complainant Mercy John is impleaded as the Additional 3^rd respondent and was duly served, she has not chosen to enter appearance and oppose the prayer in this Crl.M.C.

¶25

Even though the offence under Section 498A I.P.C is not compoundable, in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in B.S.Joshi vs. State of Haryana [AIR 2003 SC 1386], the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked by this Court to bring about a premature termination of the prosecution.

¶26

Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed and C.C.No.322/2005 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva, shall stand quashed.

¶27

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶28

Suraj Abraham v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Abraham v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sobhana Vs Mohanan

Mathew Vs Jessintha

Tomy Thomas Vs Consulate General of India

K.P.Sankarankutty and Others Vs K.P.Ammalukutty Amma and Another

Vineesh & Others Vs State of Kerala & Another

Vineesh Vs the State