Allowed

Vinodan v. the State of Kerala and Another

Kerala HC9 Mar 2010Crl.MC/595/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed criminal proceedings under sections 498A and 406 IPC initiated against the petitioner and his wife. Finding that the matrimonial disputes had been settled amicably and the parties were living together, the Court held that continuing prosecution would be futile.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Miscellaneous Case C.C.293/2009 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vadakkara is quashed.

Vinodan Vs the State of Kerala and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 595 of 2010()

¶6

----------------------------------C.C.293/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VADAKKARA. ...............

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

----------------------------------

¶9

VINODAN, AGED 43, S/O.GOPALAN, AMARAMKANDIYIL, PUTHUPPANAM AMSOM DESOM, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. MR.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT, MR.ABHILASH K.N., MR.BINU JOHN.

¶11

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶12

------------------------------------------

¶13

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

¶14

2. SHIDHA, D/O.KELAPPAN, AGED 26, 'SHEENALAYAM', MANIYUR AMSOM, ELAMBILAT DESOM, VATAKKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶15

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.K.S. SIVAKUMAR. R2 BY ADV. MR.BINU JOHN FOR R2

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

rs.

¶18

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶19

=========================== CRL.M.C.No. 595 OF 2010

¶20

===========================

¶21

Dated this the9th day of March,2010

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioner is the accused and second

¶24

respondent his wife the de facto complainant in C.C.293/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vadakkara taken cognizance for the offences under section 498A and 406 of Indian Penal Code on Annexure A1 final report in Crime 1370/2008 of Vadakkara Police Station registered under Annexure A2 complaint filed before the Magistrate by second respondent and sent for investigation under section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. This petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken and the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate on the ground that entire matrimonial disputes were settled

Crl.M.C.595/2010

amicably.

Second respondent appeared through a counsel and filed an affidavit stating that entire disputes were settled amicably and in view of the settlement, she has no objection for quashing the proceedings and she is now residing along with her husband in the matrimonial home.

¶29

Learned counsel appearing for the

¶30

petitioner, second respondent and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶31

Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that

¶32

statement of the second respondent recorded by the police subsequent to the filing of this petition reveals that there was amicable settlement of all matrimonial disputes between the husband and wife and they are now living together. The statement filed by the second respondent establishes that entire matrimonial disputes were settled and the husband and wife are living cordially under one roof. As held by the Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v.

¶33

Crl.M.C.595/2010 3

¶34

State of Haryana (2003 (4) SCC 675), when matrimonial disputes are settled amicably, it is not in the interest of justice to stand on technicalities and continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. C.C.293/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vadakkara is quashed.

¶35

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶36

tpl/-

¶37

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.

¶38

W.P.(C).NO. /06

¶39

--------------------JUDGMENT

¶40

SEPTEMBER,2006

Vinodan v. the State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinodan v. the State of Kerala and Another

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

N.P.Kuttikrishnan Nair Vs v.Aniyan, Taluk Supply Officer, Mavelikk

R.v.Shaji Vs State of Kerala and Another

N.P.Kuttikrishnan Nair Vs the District Collector,Alappuzha and Anr.

K.T.Muhammedunni & Others Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Wandoor & Anr.

M.C.Simon Vs State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan and Others Vs State of Kerala