Dismissed

Thomas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Oct 2016Crl.Rev.Pet/526/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judgment criminal revision petition preferred by the de facto complainant in a previous spirit case was dismissed. The Court held that the dispute was amicably resolved via recording a compromise in a related divorce appeal before the Family Court, rendering the petition not pressed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision petition was dismissed as the matter was resolved by compromise in a related divorce appeal.

Thomas Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/26TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 526 of 2005 (A)

¶6

SC 13/2004 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-II, KOTTAYAM DATED 16-04-2004

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/(PW2 AND INJURED IN SC.NO.13/2004):

¶8

THOMAS, THENADIKKULATHIL HOUSE, IDANADU KARA, VALLICHIRA VILLAGE.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.JOHN VARGHESE

¶10

SRI.T.SAJI

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/(COMPLAINANT AND ACCUSED NOS. 1, 2 AND 5 TO 8):

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

2. JOSHI, S/O. THOMAS, THENADIKKULATHIL

¶14

HOUSE, IDANADU KARA, VELLICHIRA VILLAGE.

¶15

3. JOBISH, DO. DO.

¶16

4. SIBI GEORGE, S/O. GEORGE JOSEPH,

¶17

THEKKEKAIMANAL HOUSE, KADUCKACHIRA KARA, VALLICHIRA VILLAGE.

¶18

5. JOHNSON JOSEPH, S/O. JOSEPH, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, KADUCKACHIRA KARA, VALLICHIRA VILLAGE.

¶19

6. GEORGE @ KUNJUKUNJU, S/O. JOHN,

¶20

MUNDAMMAKKIL HOUSE, NOW RESIDING AT THE HOUSE OF MULAKKADU CYRIAC, KADUKKACHIRA KARA, VALLICHIRA VILLAGE.

¶21

7. SABU, S/O. VARKEY, THEKKUMKATTIL HOUSE, KADUKKACHIRA KARA, VALLILCHIRA VILLAGE.

¶22

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RENJITH R2 & R7 BY ADV. SRI.K.C.PETER R3-R6 BY ADV. SRI.S.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

msv/

¶25

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J

¶26

Crl.R.P. No.526 of 2005

¶27

Dated this the 18^th day of October, 2016

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

1.This revision petition is preferred by the de facto complainant in S.C.No.13 of 2004 on the file of the Additional Sessions

¶30

Judge, Fast Track Court (Adhoc)-II, Kottayam.

¶31

2.The respondents herein are family members and near relatives of the petitioner herein. In Mat. Appeal No.870 of 2010, which was preferred by the petitioner before this Court against O.P. (Divorce) No.1158 of 2009 of the Family Court, Kottayam, the disputes were amicably resolved. Recording the compromise, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was disposed of on the ground of compromise.

¶32

3.Having regard to the above, it is prayed that the revision petition be dismissed as not pressed. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

¶33

Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE

¶34

vps

Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramla A.K. Vs State of Kerala

Ramla A.K. Vs State of Kerala

Lijin T Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Rahees P.H @ Rahees Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Muraleedharan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Shamsul Ameen Vs State of Kerala