Allowed

Sandeep Sebastian v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Oct 2020Crl.MC/3815/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed the petition and quashed the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.1476 of 2018 involving the petitioners and their wife. The court noted the dispute was settled amicably by the third respondent, found no public interest in continuing proceedings, and cited Supreme Court precedents on abuse of process to grant relief.

What did the court decide?

Crl.M.C. is allowed; proceedings in C.C.No.1476 of 2018 is quashed.

Sandeep Sebastian Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 17TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.3815 OF 2020(F)

¶6

CC 1476/2018 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, TRIPUNITHURA

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

SANDEEP SEBASTIAN AGED 38 YEARS S/O.RAJAN SEBASTIAN, FLAT NO.28C, CHOICE PARADISE, TRIPUNITHURA - 682 301.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM SMT.V.T.LITHA SMT.K.R.MONISHA SMT.SHRUTHI SARA JACOB

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, TRIPUNITHURA - 682 301.

¶13

3 JOBY SANDEEP AGED 36 YEARS W/O.SANDEEP SEBASTIAN, FLAT NO.28 C, CHOICE PARADISE, TRIPUNITHURA - 682 301.

¶14

R3 BY ADV. LIJU.V.STEPHEN R3 BY ADV. SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶18

09.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

Crl.M.C.No. 3815 of 2020

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Dated this the 09^th day of October , 2020

¶23

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1580 of 2018 registered at the Hill Palace Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 323 and 498 A of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.1476

¶24

of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Tripunithura. The de facto complainant/third respondent at whose instance the crime was registered, is the petitioner's wife. Annexure A3 affidavit has been filed by the third respondent stating that the matrimonial dispute which led to registration of the crime, has been settled amicably and she has no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶25

2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,

¶26

¶27

Crl.M.C.No. 3815 of 2020

¶28

who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.

¶29

3. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by third respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the matter has been amicably settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction is remote. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot

¶30

v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the

¶31

¶32

Crl.M.C.No. 3815 of 2020

¶33

relief.

¶34

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.1476 of 2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,

¶35

Tripunithura, is quashed.

¶36

Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶37

Scl/09.10.2020

¶38

Crl.M.C.No. 3815 of 2020

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX

¶41

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶42

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN C.C.NO.1476/2018 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT, TRIPUNITHURA DATED 02/10/2018.

¶43

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, TRIPUNITHURA IN M.C.NO.17/2018 DATED 08/07/2019.

¶44

ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT OF 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17/08/2020.

Sandeep Sebastian v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Sebastian 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambhu, Vs State of Kerala

Franklin Vs State of Kerala

Fasaludheen Vs State of Kerala

Sajan Thomas Vs the State of Kerala

Sayar P Asharaf Vs State of Kerala

Lakshmi P.R Vs State of Kerala