Allowed

Midhun v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jul 2018Crl.MC/368/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order in a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by accused persons sought to quash criminal proceedings in a matrimonial dispute pending before the Sessions Court. The Court noted a settlement reported by the family court and the complainant. Invoking inherent jurisdiction, the Court quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings pursuant to the final report in Crime No. 35/2015 pending as S.C. No. 213/2016 stand quashed.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 368 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 213/2016 of IIND ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT/NDPS, THODUPUZHA CRIME NO. 35/2015 OF KALIYAR POLICE STATION , IDUKKI

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5:

¶8

1 MIDHUN,

¶9

AGED 26 YEARS,S/O MOHANAN,RESIDING AT PUTHENNADACKAL VEEDU, CHELACHUVADU BHAGOM,VANNAPURAM KARA,VANNAPURAM VILLAGE, IDUKKI.

¶10

2 MOHANAN, AGED 63 YEARS,S/O.KUNJU,RESIDING AT PUTHENNADACKAL VEEDU, CHELACHUVADU BHAGOM,VANNAPURAM KARA,VANNAPPURAM VILLAGE, IDUKKI.

¶11

3 MAYA,

¶12

AGED 51 YEARS,W/O MOHANAN,RESIDING AT PUTHENNADACKAL VEEDU, CHELACHUVADU BHAGOM,VANNAPURAM KARA,VANNAPPURAM

¶13

VILLAGE, IDUKKI.

¶14

4 MAHESH,

¶15

AGED 31 YEARS,S/O MOHANAN,RESIDING AT PUTHENNADACKAL VEEDU, CHELACHUVADU BHAGOM,VANNAPURAM KARA,VANNAPPURAM

¶16

VILLAGE, IDUKKI.

¶17

5 ASHWATHI,

¶18

AGED 25 YEARS,W/O MAHESH,RESIDING AT PUTHENNADACKAL VEEDU, CHELACHUVADU BHAGOM,VANNAPPURAM KARA,VANNAPPURAM VILLAGE, IDUKKI.

¶19

BY ADVS.SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN

¶20

SRI.T.S.SARATH

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶22

1. STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KALIYAR POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶23

2. ANJANA MIDHUN,

¶24

W/O.MIDHUN,AGED 20 YEARS,RESIDING AT VATTAKUZHIYIL VEEDU, ANJANA MIDHUN,W/O.MIDHUN,AGED 20 YEARS,RESIDING AT

¶25

VATTAKUZHIYIL VEEDU,VANNAPURAM KARA &

¶26

VILLAGE,THODUPUZHAN TALUK,IDDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶27

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.KIRANLAL

¶28

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR:SMT M K PUSHPALATHA

¶29

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶30

Crl.MC.No. 368 of 2018 ()

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶33

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.35/2015 OF KALIYAR POLICE STATION,IDUKKI NOW PENDING AS S.C.N.213/2016 ON THE FILES OF IIND ADDL.SESSIONS COURT/NDPS,THODUPUZHA

¶34

ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.01.2017 IN CRLMC NO.6439/2017

¶35

ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.NO.346/2014 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT,THODUPUZHA.

¶36

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL

¶37

True Copy / P A to Judge

¶38

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶39

¶40

Crl.M.C.No.368 of 2018

¶41

¶42

Dated this the 12^th day of July, 2018

¶43

O R D E R

¶44

The petitioners herein are accused Nos. 1 to 5 in Crime No.35/2015 of Kaliyar police station for offences punishable under sections 313,323,341,342,408(A) ,503 and 34 IPC.

¶45

It was alleged by the 2^nd respondent that, she was subjected to matrimonial cruelty by the petitioners. Crime was registered. After investigation final report was laid and the matter is now pending as SC No.213/2016 of the IInd Addl. Sessions Court, Thodupuzha. The petitioners have approached this court with a prayer to quash the proceedings on the basis of the settlement arrived at between the parties. It is stated that, compromise was filed in O.P.No.90/2015 pending before the Family Court, Thodupuzha, reiterating the settlement.

¶46

Learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that, she has no objection in quashing the proceedings in the light of Annexure A3.

¶47

Crl.M.C.368/18

¶48

¶49

Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that parties have settled their disputes. Signed statement of the defacto complainant has been recorded by the investigating agency. I am inclined to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 Cr.P.C.and to quash the proceedings.

¶50

Accordingly, Crl.M.C.is allowed. All further proceedings pursuant to Annexure A1 final report in Crime No. 35/2015 of Kaliyar police station now pending as SC No.213/2016 of the IInd Addl. Sessions Court/NDPS, Thodupuzha stand quashed.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

SUNIL THOMAS Judge

¶53

dpk

¶54

/true copy/ PS to Judge.

Midhun v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Midhun 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

Sreejith S Vs State of Kerala

Sharon Prakash Vs Athira T.K.

P.v.Nandakumar Vs Rajeshwari

P.P.Mohammed Yaseen Vs Smt. N.Geetha

Vipin Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Surendran Vs Shihabudhin.T.a