Allowed

Jayaram.v Iyyer v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Nov 2018Crl.MC/7385/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashes criminal proceedings under section 354 IPC filed against the petitioner for outraging modesty. The court allowed the quashing order based on the settlement reached between the petitioner and the second respondent, dismissing further criminal action.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings arising from Crime No.1708 of 2018 will stand quashed; petitioner released from jail if presence not required.

Jayaram.v Iyyer Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 02ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 7385 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 1708/2018 OF Ernakulam Town North Police Station , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

JAYARAM.V IYYER AGED 59 YEARS S/O LATE K.V. IYYER, FLAT NO.4E, GOLDEN HEAVEN, FRIENDS LANE, VAZHAKALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM SRI.J.ABHILASH SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶13

2 NITHA ANTONY AGED 21 YEARS

¶14

D/O ANTONY, CHAMPADYPARAMBU HOUSE,AZHIKAKKAM KARA, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 018

¶15

BY ADVS. SMT.KAVYA P.PRASAD SRI.S.RAMESH(VAIKOM)

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

T.R RENJITH PP

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.7385/18

ORDER

Petitioner herein stands arrayed as accused in Crime No.1708 of 2018 of Ernakulam Town North Police Station for offences punishable under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

According to the prosecution, on 30.10.2018, petitioner herein outraged the modesty of the second respondent and committed the offence. The investigation is progressing and the petitioner is reported to be arrested and remanded.

¶24

According to the petitioner, he is a chartered accountant having a more than 30 years standing and the incident happened due to misunderstanding. The second respondent/defacto complainant appeared through Mrs.Kavya Prasad and S.Ramesh and they have filed vakkalath. The counsel invited my attention to Annexure-A2 which is an affidavit affirmed by the second respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the second respondent submitted that the matter has been settled and that, the complaint was laid on a misunderstanding. It was stated that, she does not propose to pursue the criminal proceedings. Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the second respondent has informed over telephone that the matter has been settled and the statement will be given by her.

¶25

Crl.M.C.7385/18

¶26

¶27

Having considered this, I am inclined to quash the further

¶28

proceedings.

¶29

In the result, Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings arising from Crime No.1708 of 2018 of Ernakulam Town North Police Station will stand quashed. Petitioner shall be released from jail, if his presence is not required in connection with any other crime.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

Sbna/

Crl.M.C.7385/18

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶38

ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R NO.1708/2018 OF ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT

Jayaram.v Iyyer v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayaram.v Iyyer 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

K.J.Manu Vs State of Kerala

Rajeshkumar C.R Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Kumar Vs Sneha

S.L.P. Kunhibi @ Kunjalima Vs State of Kerala

Sasi @ Sivaramakrishnan Vs Deepa

Ramani Vs State