Subeesh.P v. Victim
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged prosecution for rape alleging conditional promise to marry. Court quashed proceedings citing marital relationship and victim retraction, holding offence not to lie in such consensual contexts.
What did the court decide?
Crl.M.C. allowed and all further proceedings in the pending Sessions Court case arising from Crime No.1728/2013 stood quashed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1940
Crl.MC.No. 1503 of 2018
PENDING AS SC 90/2017 of PRINCIPAL SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO. 1728/2013 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED
SUBEESH.P
AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.SURESH, ULLATTUCHALIL HOUSE, NEAR MILMA COMPANY, SIVAGIRI BHAGOM, KUNNAMANGALAM, KARATHOOR VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 511.
BY ADV.SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN
RESPONDENT(S)/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT AND COMPLAINANT:
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 376 IPC should be quashed given that the parties have entered into a matrimonial relationship and the dispute is resolved.
Whether the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings extends to condonation of false promise to marry cases.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Subeesh.P
- respondent
Renjithamol
- respondent
State of Kerala
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court