Disposed

Sajeevan v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC4 Nov 2020Crl.MC/1451/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal M.C. under Section 482 Cr.PC filed to quash a criminal complaint and FIR in a matrimonial dispute involving allegations of bigamy and adultery. The court disposed of the petition due to the petitioner's failure to appear and furnish instructions, leaving contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of; leave granted to move for discharge or other remedies in appropriate proceedings.

Sajeevan Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Kerala HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 13TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.1451 OF 2015

¶6

CRMC 2638/2013 DATED 06-11-2013 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM

¶7

CMP 4618/2013 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,TRIVANDRUM/SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF CYBER CRIME

¶8

CRIME NO.1388/2013 OF Museum Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶9

PETITIONER/FIRST ACCUSED:

¶10

SAJEEVAN AGED 42 YEARS ALVINA NIVAS, MANALOOR VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI

¶12

RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶13

1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MUESEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695033

¶14

2 MINI T.C.NO.15/682/5, SRELAKAM, PALATTUKONAM, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014

¶15

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

¶16

BY ADVS SRI.RAMESH CHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶20

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶21

Criminal M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶22

Dated this the 4^th day of November, 2020

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The prayer in the afore captioned Criminal Miscellaneous Case filed under 482 of Cr.PC is as follows:

¶25

“......to quash Annexures-I & II ie, C.M.P No.4618/2013 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram and crime No.1388/2013 before the Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram respectively.”

¶26

Heard Sri.B.Krishna Mani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused, Sri.Ramesh Chand, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for official respondents 1 & 3 and Sri.Shajin.S.Hameed, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent (lady defacto complainant).

¶27

The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in the impugned Anx-II FIR in Crime No.1388/2013 of Thiruvananthapuram Museum Police Station for offences punishable under Secs.376, 420, 494, 498 (A) and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, in pursuance of the private criminal complaint filed by the 2^nd respondent, in which the learned Magistrate had directed the police

¶28

¶29

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶30

to conduct investigation etc,.

¶31

In this case, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, DCRB, Thiruvananthapuram city has filed a statement dated 07-10-2015, which reads as follows:

¶32

“1. The defacto complainant in the above case is Smt.Mini, aged 33, D/o.Thankamony, TC 15/682/5, Sreelakom, Palattukonam, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram City. The petitioner in Crl.M.C.No. 1451/2015 is the first accused in the case. The other accused in the case are Manoharan, aged 49, S/o.Thampy, MB Bhavan, Ambalatharavilakom, Arayoor, Chenkal Village, Neyyattinkara and Alosious Mark Dayas @ Saju, aged 42, S/O LBM Dayas, Sreevinayaka, House No.54, Vazhavila, Parakkod Lane, Nalanchira, Thiruvananthapuram.

¶33

2. The case is that the accused 1 to 3 conspired together and made the defacto complainant to believe that A1/petitioner is a bachelor Hindu and persuaded the complainant to marry him. Accordingly, marriage between the defacto complainant and A1 took place at Guruvayoor Temple on 26.08.2010. Thereafter, the complainant and the petitioner in this Crl.M.C lived together in a rented house as husband and wife. Complainant alleged that she believed that A1/petitioner is her lawful husband and that is why she gave consent to have sexual relationship with him. The complainant gave birth a female baby on 04.04.2013. Thereafter, A1 abandoned the complainant and child and thereafter used to engage in illicit relationship with other ladies. A1 under the instigation of A2 and A3 misappropriated 30 sovereign of gold ornaments and Rs.2 lakhs belonging to the complainant. The gold ornaments were pledged by the A1 and the amount was also taken by him.

¶34

3. The case investigated by the Inspector of Police, Museum was taken over by then the Assistant commissioner of Police, DCRB, Thiruvananthapuram City on 12.11.2014, vide order No.D1/70390/2014 TC dated 06.11.2014 of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Thiruvananthapuram City. The investigation so far revealed the following:

¶35

The defacto complainant had married one Shaji on 1996 and had two children. Her husband Shaji was a drunkard and hence she got separated from her husband 4 years back and then she used to live along with her parents. The 1^st accused Sajeevan belongs to Christian Sambhava Community and he

¶36

¶37

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶38

married a lady named Reetha on 07.09.2000 and living with their two children at Neyyattinkara. The 1^st accused in this case had illicit relationship with the defato complainant from 2010 onwards and they were living together and a female child named Ashitha was born to them on 04.04.2013. After the birth of the child, problems arose among them and then defacto complainant in this case filed CMP No.4618/2013 before the Hon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram based on which this case was registered. A copy of complaint in CMP No.4618/2013 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure-I.

¶39

It is submitted that, investigation conducted so far revealed that A2 and A3 have no connection in the alleged incident and hence section was altered to section 376, 420, 498(A) and 494 IPC. Moreover, a request for. conducting DNA test has also been made before the Hon'ble Court and now the investigation is only against Al. The respondent is taking steps to delete section 494 IPC.

¶40

Therefore, it is humbly prayed that the petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be dismissed and allow this respondent to proceed with investigation, in the interest of justice.”

¶41

Now the Registry has been apprised by the office of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram that the case is now pending as Committal Proceedings C.P No.6/2017 and that non-bailable warrant has been issued against the petitioner/accused etc.

¶42

Sri.B.Krishna Mani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused would submit that he had sent a registered notice to the petitioner/accused to furnish him instructions regarding the subsequent development in the case. But the said registered notice

¶43

¶44

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶45

has been returned unserved and that this Court may close the petition without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner.

¶46

Since the petitioner has not apprised this Court about the subsequent development in this case and he has not even furnished instructions through his counsel, there is no necessity to keep this petition pending any longer. All contentions are left open to be raised by the petitioner in appropriate proceedings in the manner known to law and liberty is accorded to the petitioner to work out his remedies in the manner known to law, including the option to seek discharge, provided such application for discharge is filed before the framing of charges etc,.

¶47

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal M.C will stand disposed of.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

ALEXANDER THOMAS,

JUDGE

KAS

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶54

APPENDIX

¶55

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶56

ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED NIL. ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 11-10-2013 IN CRIME NO.1388/2013 BEFORE THE MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶57

ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6-11-2013 IN CRIMINAL M.C.NO.2638/2013 BEFORE THE SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 5-112013 FILED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT BEFORE THE DIRECTOR, AIRPRT AUTHORITY OF INDIA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE V TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 11-11-2012

¶58

ANNEXURE VI TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22-112013.

¶59

ANNEXURE VII TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION M.C.NO.31/2013 DATED 25-9-2013 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATEIII, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶60

ANNEXURE VIII TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28-4-2014 MC NO.31/2013 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶61

¶62

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶63

ANNEXURE IX TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING, M.C.NO;94/2014 DATED 26-3-2014 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATEIII, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE X TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30-4-2014 IN MC NO.94/2014 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE XI TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETEITION OP NO.1082/2014 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE XII TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 30-9214 IN OP NO.1082/2014 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE XIII TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.2087/2014 DATED 30-6-2014 IN OP NO.1082/2014 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE XIV TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 23-82014 IN IA 2087/2014 IN OP NO.1082/2014 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶64

ANNEXURE XV TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION NO.1704/2014 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 6-11-2014 ANNEXURE XVI TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE XVII TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 29-122011 ANNEXURE XVIII TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE DATED 7-9-2000 ANNEXURE XIX TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH ANNEXURE XX TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH

¶65

¶66

Crl.M.C No.1451 of 2015

¶67

ANNEXURE XXI TRUE COPY OF THE BANK GUARANTEE DATED 29-8-2013

¶68

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶69

ANNEXURE I A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN CMP NO.4618/2013

Sajeevan v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajeevan v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jamshed Sheikh Vs State of Kerala

Deepa Govind Vs State of Kerala

Shajahan Vs the State of Kerala

Nithin.K.R., Vs State of Kerala

Alwin Augustine Vs State of Kerala

Abdu Nazar Nechikkadan Vs the State of Kerala