In a criminal appeal regarding offences of bigamy and cruelty under the IPC, the High Court of Kerala petition under section 482 CrPC. Citing an amicable settlement and resumption of cohabitation, the court quashed the cognizance.
Quashing of the cognizance taken on Annexure A final report in C.C.642/2006 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva.
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 M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931
Crl.MC.No. 118 of 2010()
---------------------------------CC.642/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, ALUVA CRIME NO.250/2006 OF KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION.
PETITIONER/ACCUSED
----------------------------------
KUMAR @ SALIM KUMAR, S/O.SUDHAKARAN, AGED 41, CHULLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANNAMKARA, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM (DIST).
BY ADV. MR.ANIL K.MOHAMMED
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
2. JAYASREE, D/O.KELAN, PALAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ELAMAKKARA, EDAPPALLY SOUTH VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM (DIST).
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.S. SIVAKUMAR.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
===========================
CRL.M.C.No. 118 OF 2010
===========================
Dated this the 15th day of February,2010
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused and second
respondent the de facto complainant in C.C.642/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva taken cognizance for the offences under section 495, 498A of Indian Penal Code, on Annexure A final report. This petition is filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that in view of the settlement of matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and second respondent, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.
counsel and filed Annexure B affidavit stating that subsequently there has been an amicable
Crl.M.C.118/2010 2
settlement of the disputes between the parties and she is now living with the petitioner and in such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution.
petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
Crl.M.C.118/2010 3
Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675), it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution when the matrimonial disputes are settled and the husband and wife are living together.
Petition is allowed. Cognizance taken on Annexure A final report in C.C.642/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Aluva is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
tpl/-
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
W.P.(C).NO. /06
--------------------JUDGMENT
SEPTEMBER,2006
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition under section 482 CrPC is maintainable to quash proceedings based on an amicable settlement of matrimonial disputes and resumption of conjugal life.
Whether it is in the interest of justice to continue prosecution when the husband and wife are living together after settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S.Joshi v. State of HaryanaFollowed¶33
B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kumar @ Salim Kumar
State
Jayasree
M.Sasidharan Nambiar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
