The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal misc. case filed by an accused to quash proceedings in a matrimonial dispute involving offences under IPC 294(b), 498-A, 323, 324 and 326, based on a settlement affidavit by the wife and absence of public interest.
The criminal proceedings in Crime No.2466/2020 registered at the Kundara Police Station 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 V.G.ARUN
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1942
Crl.MC.No.4524 OF 2020(E)
CRIME NO.2466/2020 OF Kundara Police Station , Kollam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ANOOP A. AGED 31 YEARS S/O. ARJUNAN, CHARUVILA PUTHANVEEDU, KOTTAMKARA, CHANDANATHOPPU P O, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH
RESPONDENT/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
3 ABHIRAMI S., AGED 22 YEARS D/O. SINDHU, MANIMANDIRAM HOUSE, NEAR MUNDANCHIRA MADANKAVU, KOTTANGARA, CHANDANATHOPPU P O, PERINADU, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691014.
R3 BY ADV. K.S.PRAVEEN
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP.AMJAD ALI
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.4524 OF 2020(E) ..2..
ORDER
Dated this the 24th day of November 2020 Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.2466/2020 registered at the Kundara Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 294(b), 498-A, 323, 324 and 326 of IPC. The de facto complainant, at whose instance the crime was registered, is the petitioner’s wife and is arrayed as the 3rd respondent herein. Eventhough the petitioner is alleged to have caused fracture to the de facto complainant, she has filed Annexure-B affidavit stating that the matrimonial dispute, which had compelled her to submit the complaint leading to registration of the crime, has been resolved amicably and they are living together harmoniously.
Crl.MC.No.4524 OF 2020(E) ..3..
no criminal antecedents.
the legal position set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot 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 relief sought.
Crl.MC.No.4524 OF 2020(E) ..4..
In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The
proceedings in Crime No.2466/2020 registered at the Kundara Police Station is quashed.
SB/24/11/2020
Sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE
Crl.MC.No.4524 OF 2020(E) ..5..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF F.I.R AND F.IS IN CRIME NO. 2466/2020 OF KUNDARA POLICE STATION, DATED 21.08.2020 5- 104.
ANNEXURE B AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT, DATED 30.09.2020.
//true copy// P.A to Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings in a matrimonial dispute can be quashed upon settlement when public interest is not involved.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of PunjabRelied on¶25
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582 · Who else cites this
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and anotherRelied on¶25
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
Anoop A.
The State of Kerala
Abhirami S.
V.G.ARUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
