Dismissed

Biju Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Sept 2019Crl.MC/1543/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam, granting leave to withdraw the current criminal miscellaneous petition, allowed the petitioner to file a fresh comprehensive petition seeking quashment of proceedings on the grounds of premature termination of pregnancy affecting DNA testing. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to withdraw petition and file a fresh one. Impugned order stood dismissed.

Biju Mathew Vs the State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 11TH BHADRA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.1543 OF 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRLMP 2668/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

CRIME NO.487/2017 OF Aranmula Police Station , Pathanamthitta

¶8

PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED:

¶9

BIJU MATHEW

¶10

AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW VARGHESE,RESIDING AT THAZHAYIL MEPPURATHU VEEDU,VALIYAKULAM, NARANGANAM EAST MURI,NARANGANAM VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN

¶12

RESPONDENT/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶13

1 THE STATE OF KERALA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,ARANMULA POLICE STATION,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA - 682 031.

¶14

2 VICTIM

¶15

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.T.S.SARATH R1 BY ADV. SRI.SAJESH K. SAM

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Crl.M.C.No.1543/2018

¶20

¶21

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶22

Crl.M.C.No. 1543 of 2018

¶23

Dated this the 2^nd day of September, 2019

¶24

ORDER

¶25

Sri.Manu Ramachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner on the basis of instructions would submit that leave may be granted to the petitioner to withdraw the Crl.M.C. to file a fresh comprehensive petition seeking quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings on the ground that the 2^nd respondent defacto complainant had prematurely terminated her pregnancy and could thus prevent the petitioner’s attempt to get DNA testing to ascertain whether he was in any manner responsible for her pregnancy etc. and other relevant grounds. It is urged by the petitioner’s counsel that the specific case of the petitioner is that he was not in any manner responsible for the alleged pregnancy of the 2^nd respondent and that the petitioner had insisted for DNA testing which has now been defeated by the conduct of the 2^nd respondent in prematurely terminated her pregnancy etc. Leave is accorded to the petitioner to work out his remedies in the manner known to law. At the request of the petitioner, it is further ordered that the certified copy of the

¶26

Crl.M.C.No.1543/2018

¶27

¶28

impugned Annexures-A1 FIR & A-3 Affidavit shall be returned back to the learned counsel for the petitioner, if a request in that regard is made. However, the Registry will ensure that a copy of the said document is placed in this case file for the purpose of maintenance of records.

¶29

With the said liberty, the above Crl.M.C. will stand dismissed.

¶30

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.

acd

Crl.M.C.No.1543/2018

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶36

ANNEXURE-A1. THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.487/2017 OF ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶37

ANNEXURE-A4. THE TRUE COPY OF THE CMP NO.2668/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED SEEKING DNA TEST BEFORE THE JFMC-I, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶38

ANNEXURE-A3. THE ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 2/3/2018 SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT.

¶39

True Copy

¶40

P.S. To Judge.

Biju Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sooraj@Kunjan Vs State of Kerala

Purushan, Vs Arya

Devassy @ Rajan Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

N.Lathesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Suresh, Vs the State of Kerala