Allowed

Biju Prabhakaran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 May 2018Crl.MC/2826/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC against a petitioner. Relying on the settlement between the disputing parties and the Supreme Court precedent in Parbatbhai Aahir, the court held that further prosecution would serve no purpose and invoked Section 482 CrPC to quash the trial.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.876 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tripunithura, stood quashed.

Biju Prabhakaran Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MAY 2018 / 25TH VAISAKHA, 1940

¶4

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CC 876/2015 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIPUNITHURA

¶5

CRIME NO. 1108/2012 OF HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶6

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED

¶7

BIJU PRABHAKARAN, AGED 41 YEARS,S/O PRABHAKARAN,MADHAVA MANDIRAM, PATTUMUKKU,KARUVATTA NORTH,ALAPPUZHA.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY SRI.D.FEROZE

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031,(CRIME NO.1108/2012 OF HILL PALACE, POLICE STATION,THRIPUNITHURA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT).

¶11

2. ANJANA MENON, AGED 31 YEARS,D/O.K.MOHANAN,SHIVAKRIPA,KOLLAMPADY, TRIPUNITHURA,ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶12

R2 BY ADV. SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. HRITHWIK C.S.

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-05-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.MC.No. 2826 of 2018 ()

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶17

ANNEXURE-I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO.876/2015 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS,TRIPUNITHURA

¶18

ANNEXURE-II AFFIDAVIT DATED 27.01.2018 SWORN BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

¶19

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:-NIL

KRJ

//true copy//

P.A. To Judge

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.

¶24

Crl.M.C.No.2826 of 2018

¶25

Dated this the 15^th day of May, 2018

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

1.The petitioner herein has been arraigned as the accused in C.C.No.876 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tripunithura for offence punishable under Section 498A r/w. Section 34 of the IPC. The 2^nd respondent herein is the de facto complainant, who is none other than the wife of the petitioner herein.

¶28

2.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the 2^nd respondent and also the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶29

3.It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the parties that they have managed to resolve the disputes. Their application for divorce was allowed by the Family Court and they are residing separately. The 2^nd respondent has sworn AnnexureAII affidavit asserting that she has no subsisting grievance. Copious reliance is placed on Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur And Ors Versus State Of Gujarat And Anr. [2017 (9) SCC 641] to substantiate their contention.

¶30

Crl.M.C.No.2826 of 2018 2

¶31

4.I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions

¶32

made across the Bar and I have also gone through the materials on record. There were marital disputes between the parties and it appears that they have resolved the same. In a case such as the instant one, even if the prosecution is permitted to drag on, it would not serve any purpose as the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It can only result in putting the de facto complainant and the accused to unwanted oppression and prejudice. Settlement will augur well for the interest of both the parties as they have decided to go separate ways. I am of the view that proceedings can justifiably be quashed invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code.

¶33

In the result, this petition is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.876 of 2015 on the file of

¶34

the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Thripunithura, will stand quashed.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶37

ps/15/5/2018 //true copy// P.S to Judge

Biju Prabhakaran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Prabhakaran 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Praveen R.B. Vs State of Kerala

Johnson George Vs the State of Kerala

Byju.C Vs the State of Kerala

Hareesan @ Hareeshkumar Vs State of Kerala

Shafeeq.P Vs State of Kerala

Manikuttan @ Sastheri Valsalam Vs State of Kerala