Dismissed

Ajidas v. N.K.Subidha

Kerala HC18 Nov 2011Crl.MC/1356/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a criminal miscellaneous petition. Despite explorations for a possible settlement, the complainant expressed no willingness to settle or appear for mediation. The court declined to consider merits on merits, ordered the Magistrate to explore settlement as a default safeguard, and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The criminal miscellaneous petition was dismissed; the Magistrate was directed to explore the possibility of settlement before trial.

Ajidas Vs N.K.Subidha — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1933

¶4

Crl.MC.No. 1356 of 2011()

¶5

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

¶6

CC.375/2010 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,KOYILANDY ....................

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 5

¶8

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

¶9

1. AJIDAS, S/O APPUKUTTAN, VALIYA VEEDU, 16/602, KUNNATHUMEDU P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶10

2. APPUKUTTAN, VALIYA VEEDU, 16/602, KUNNATHUMEDU P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶11

3. LEKSHMIDEVI, W/O APPUKUTTAN, VALIYA VEEDU, 16/602, KUNNATHUMEDU P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶12

4. AJITHA, CHEMUKAKALAM, MANKAVA P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶13

5. ANIDAS, S/O APPUKUTTAN, VALIYA VEEDU, 16/602, KUNNATHUMEDU P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶14

BY ADVS. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI SRI.SIJU RAJAN

¶15

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE

¶16

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

¶17

1. N.K.SUBIDHA, D/O SREENIVASAN N.K., 38/130 B, LAVANYA, ATHANIKKAL EAST, PUTHIYANGADI AMSOM, EDAKKAD DESOM, P.O.WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE-673005.

¶18

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

¶19

R1 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

¶22

Crl.MC.No. 1356 of 2011()

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

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

¶25

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶26

ANNEXURE I. COPY OF THE M.C. NO.45/09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 11.2.09.

¶27

ANNEXURE II. COPY OF THE DETAILED COUNTER STATEMENT DATED 1.8.09 IN M.C. NO.45/09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶28

ANNEXURE III. COPY OF THE JOINT STATEMENT DATED 18.9.09 IN M.C. NO.45/09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶29

ANNEXURE IV. COPY OF THE ORDER DTED 23.9.09 8IN M.C. NO.45/09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KZHIKODE.

¶30

ANNEXURE V. COPY OF THE M.C. 380/09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 28.12.09.

¶31

ANNEXURE VI. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.6.2010 IN M.C. 380/09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE.

¶32

ANNEXURE VII. COPY OF THE CMP NO.5994/09 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOYILANDI DATED 7.12.09.

¶33

ANNEXURE VIII. COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 24.3.2010 IN CRIME NO.375/09 BEFORE THE ELATHUR POLICE STATION.

¶34

ANNEXUR IX. COPY OF THE OP N.404/2010 BEFRE THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD DATED 7.4.2009

¶35

ANNEXURE X. COPY OF THE PETITION OP 281/09 DATED 7.4.09 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD.

¶36

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE : NIL

/ TRUE COPY /

P.A. O JUDGE

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶41

Crl.M.C.No.1356 of 2011

¶42

Dated this the 18^th day of November, 2011

¶43

Order

¶44

The petitioners 1 to 5 are the accused in CC No.375 of 2010 on the file of JFCM Court, Koyilandi. When this petition was admitted, in the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and in the light of what was stated in the petition, notice was issued to the first respondent to explore the possibility of settlement, if any. Though the case underwent three or four adjournments and though the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent was enquired as to whether there is any possibility of settlement, the information received by the learned counsel from the first respondent is that there is no possibility of settlement and that the first respondent is not ready to appear before the Mediation Centre.

¶45

As the case is pending before the learned Magistrate, it is not necessary to consider the merits or demerits of the case as the parties can advance their contentions before the court below. However, still the learned Magistrate can explore the possibility

¶46

Crl.M.C.1356/11

¶47

¶48

of settlement, if any, before proceeding for trial.

¶49

The Crl.M.C. is disposed of as above.

¶50

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶51

srd

¶52

Crl.M.C.1356/11 3

Ajidas v. N.K.Subidha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajidas v. N.K.Subidha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijayan .T.R. Vs Biju N.R.

Sahadevan & Others Vs Sunitha & Another

Ramesan Vs Latha

K.P.Sunilkumar Vs Bindu M.V

Lissamma T Vs the State of Kerala and Another

Riyas Vs State of Kerala