The High Court of Kerala held that continuing criminal proceedings against the petitioner was a wastage of time and abuse of court process due to acquittal of co-accused and the respondent's failure to cooperate, ordering quashing.
All further proceedings in Crime No.139/1994 led to C.C.No.605/2019 taken against the petitioner are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 30TH ASWINA, 1941
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 605/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, KANJIRAPPALLY
CRIME NO.139/1994 OF Pallikkathode Police Station , Kottayam
PETITIONER/S:
MATHEW N.THOMAS, AGED 55 YEARS S/O. LATE THOMAS, NEDUVELIL HOUSE, VAZHOOR EAST P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686504.
BY ADVS. SRI.NOBLE MATHEW SRI.LIJOY P.VARGHESE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALLIKKATHODU POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686503.
3 * SMT. ANU MATHEW, NEDUVELIL HOUSE, VAZHOOR EAST P.O, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686504.
*THE NAME OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT WILL STAND CORRECTED AS FOLLOWS AS PER ORDER DTD. 22.10.2019 IN CRL.M.C.NO.5561/2019
SMT.ANU MATHEW @ ANU THOMAS @ ANNAMMA JACOB, D/O. THOMAS, PUTHEN CHIRAMEL HOUSE, NEDUMKUNNAM KARA, NEDUMKUNNAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
::2::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J .
Crl.M.C.No.5561 Of 2019
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2019.
O R D E R
The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.1 in the impugned Anx-A1 private criminal complaint filed as Crl.M.P.No.6896/1994 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kanjirappally on 20.10.1994. The learned Magistrate has issued directions under Sec.156(3) of the Cr.P.C ordering that the Police Shall register the Crime and investigate the matter in respect of the allegations made out in Anx-A1 complaint. Thereupon, the Police has registered Anx-A2 Crime No.139/1994 of Pallikkathodu Police Station on 21.10.1994 wherein the petitioner herein (A1) and 5 others were arrayed as accused for offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 149, 448, 294(b), 506(ii) & 427 of the I.P.C. The Police after investigation has filed the impugned Anx-A3 Final Report/Charge Sheet in the abovesaid Crime No.139/1994 of Pallikkathodu Police Station for the very same offences as against all the abovesaid accused persons including the petitioner (A1), which has led to the pendency of
::3::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
C.C.No.418/1995 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kanjirappally. The case against the petitioner (A1) was split up and the trial against all other original accused (A2 to A6) was proceeded and the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kanjirappally, as per judgment dated 8.12.1997 in C.C.No.418/1995 had acquitted all the abovesaid accused persons therein (A2 to A6), who faced trial. The charge witnesses are those mentioned in Anx-A3 Final Report/Charge Sheet given on page 18 of the paper book. The 3rd respondent was the then wife of the petitioner (A1) and presumably out of family disputes, the petitioner and other accused persons had trespassed into her house and pelted stones and abused her using highly foul and bad language and intimidated and threatened her, etc. CW1 in this case is none other than the 3rd respondent. All the charge witnesses including CW2 (petitioner's wife-R3 herein) had not turned up to give evidence. Though various warrants and summons have been issued to CW2, she has not turned up and cooperated with the trial court and thereby the learned Magistrate acquitted all the other accused persons.
::4::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
marriage when the marriage proposal was mooted by the petitioner and it is on that basis, petitioner's marriage with the 3rd respondent was solemnised. Later, when it is came to understand that 3rd respondent's marriage is subsisting and also the fact that she has a child in the previous marriage, the petitioner had filed O.P.(Div).No.4603/1994 before this Court under the provisions of the Indian Divorce Act. This Court as per Anx-A4 judgment dated 7.8.1196 in O.P(Div).No.4603/1994 has held that the 3rd respondent herein has suppressed the crucial fact regarding her earlier subsisting marriage at the time of the marriage with the petitioner and her marriage with the petitioner is a nullity and had accordingly, decreed.
::5::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
evidence despite warrants and other coercive measures taken against her by the learned Magistrate, etc.
::6::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
prosecution could not produce the said witnesses irrespective of repeated directions and issuance of warrant, etc. Later, the examination of the remaining prosecution witnesses had dispensed with and judgment was pronounced in C.C.No.418/1995 acquitting all the other accused persons (A2 to A6) and that no separate written judgment is so far traced out in the case bundle pertaining to C.C.No.418/1995.
::7::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
the prosecution witnesses. The address of the 3rd respondent was also not traceable and notice was served on the 3rd respondent in her parental home. Though the 3rd respondent was served, she has not entered appearance. Even the original judgment of acquittal is not seen traceable. The incidents in relation to the abovesaid Crime has occurred as early as on 15.10.1994.
further proceedings in Anx-A3 Final Report/Charge Sheet filed in Crime No.139/1994 of Pallikkathodu Police Station, which has now led to C.C.No.605/2019 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kanjirappally and all further proceedings in C.C.No.605/2019 taken against the petitioner herein will stand quashed.
::8::
Crl.MC.No.5561 OF 2019(E)
The Registry will forward a copy of this order to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kanjirappally, for necessary information at the cost of the petitioner. The petitioner as well as the Office of the Advocate General will forward a copy of this order to the Investigating Officer for necessary information.
With these observations and directions, the above Crl.M.C will stand finally disposed of.
Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.
bkn/-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| ANNEXURE A1 | CERTIFIED COPY OF | THE CMP.NO.6896/94. |
|---|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2 | CERTIFIED COPY OF 2ND RESPONDENT. |
THE FIR REGISTERED BY THE |
| ANNEXURE A3 | CERTIFIED COPY OF THE 2ND RESPONDE FIRST CLASS MAGIST |
THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY NT BEFORE THE JUDICIAL RATE COURT, KANJIRAPALLY. |
| ANNEXURE A4 | TRUE COPY OF THE COURT IN O.P(DIVOR |
JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE CE)NO.4603/94. |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether continuing criminal proceedings against the petitioner constitutes an abuse of the process of the court.
Mathew N. Thomas
State of Kerala
Sub Inspector of Police, Pallikkathodu
Anu Mathew
Alexander Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
