Allowed

Bijoy v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Dec 2015Crl.MC/6095/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the prosecution against the petitioners in a case under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. The court held that an amicable settlement between the parties justified quashing the proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, as continuing the case would serve no purpose.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed. The prosecution in C.C No. 2564/2015 is quashed. The petitioners stand released, and any bail bond executed by them is discharged.

Bijoy Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 6095 of 2015

¶6

IN CRMP 5010/2015 of J.M.F.C.,KUNNAMKULAM DATED CRIME NO. 1213/2015 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION , TRISSUR

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

¶8

1. BIJOY, AGED 41 YEARS,

¶9

S/O.PUTHOOR VEETTIL KURIAKOSE, AKKIKAVU VILLAGE, PORKKULAM PANCHAYATH, THALAPPILLY TALUK,

¶10

THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶11

2. BABY KURIAKOSE, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O.PUTHOOR VEETTIL KURIAKOSE, AKKIKAVU VILLAGE, PORKKULAM PANCHAYATH, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.THIYYANNOOR RAMAKRISHNAN

¶13

SRI.ARUN KUMAR.P

¶14

SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶16

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SI OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031.

¶17

2. ANN MARIA @ ANNA MARIA, AGED 28 YEARS, D/O.ANITHA, CHEMMANNOOR HOUSE, KUNNAMKULAM VILLAGE, THALAPPILLY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 503.

¶18

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.I.JOHNSON R2 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.MOIDEEN KUTTY R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SHEEBA M.T

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.MC.No. 6095 of 2015

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

¶23

ANNEXURE 1 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CRIMINAL M.P. 5010/2015 DT 19-6-2015 FILED BEFORE THE JFCM COURT, KUNNAMKULAM.

¶24

ANNEXURE 2 : CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1213/2015 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION.

¶25

ANNEXURE 3 : COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF PASSPORT OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶26

ANNEXURE 4 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.3676 OF 2015 PREFERRED BY PETITIONERS.

¶27

ANNEXURE 5 : COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶28

ANNEXURE 6 : COPY OF OP 1504/2014 FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR.

¶29

ANNEXURE 7 : COPY OF THE INVITATION CARD OF MARRIAGE BETWEEN THE 1ST PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶30

ANNEXURE 8 : COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C NO.2564/2015 OF THE J.F.C.M KUNNAMKULAM

¶31

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

P.UBAID, J. --------------------------------------Crl.M.C No.6095 of 2015 ---------------------------------------

¶37

Dated this the 15^th day of December, 2015

¶38

O R D E R

¶39

The petitioners herein are the two accused in C.C No.2564/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam. They seek orders quashing the prosecution on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between them and the de facto complainant. Crime in this case was registered under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code on the complaint of one Ann Maria @ Anna Maria, who is the second respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. She has filed affidavit to the effect that she has settled the whole dispute with the accused, and she has no grievance or complaint now.

¶40

In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution in pending proceedings, if the parties have really settled the whole dispute amicably out of court, and continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose in such a circumstance of amicable settlement. Here, I find a real and genuine case of settlement between the parties. This is not a case

¶41

¶42

Crl.M.C No.6095 of 2015

¶43

involving any public interest or public issue. The parties have come to terms amicably on the intervention of persons acceptable to both sides. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will support the prosecution in such a situation, if the case goes to trial. The victim's affidavit shows that the whole matrimonial dispute stands resolved forever, and that the parties have parted ways in terms of the settlement. It is submitted that the marriage stands dissolved. Thus, the whole dispute stands resolved forever, and the claims also stand settled. In such a situation, it is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.

¶44

In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners herein in C.C No.2564/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kunnamkulam will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged.

¶45

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE //True Copy//

¶46

P.A to Judge

¶47

Bijoy v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijoy 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Haridas @ Narayanankutty Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Kumar Vs the Regional Passport Officer

Ajitha Vs Beena

Fatheela Beegom Vs State

Panniyodan Abdul Nazar Vs Jameela Chooryan

Shijimon Joseph Vs State of Kerala