Allowed

Shyamlal v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Nov 2021Crl.MC/3494/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Supreme Court quashed a criminal case under Sections 498A IPC and 34 IPC in a matrimonial dispute. The Court held that since the issues were private, amicably settled, and parties were living separately, continuing proceedings constituted an abuse of process of court.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 1541/2016 pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Attingal, in Crime No. 1055/2016 were quashed.

Shyamlal Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3494 OF 2021

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1541/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF

¶7

FIRST CLASS -II,ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN CRIME NO 1055/2016 OF MANAGALAPURAM POLICE STATION.

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1-3:

¶9

1 SHYAMLAL AGED 39 YEARS S/O.SASI, B.S.BHAVAN VEEDU, VEYILOOR VILLAGE, CHEMPAKAMANGALAM DESOM, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2 BABY AGED 59 YEARS D/O.CHELLAMMA, B.S.BHAVAN VEEDU, VEYILOOR VILLAGE, CHEMPAKAMANGALAM DESOM, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

3 SHYAMA AGED 32 YEARS D/O.BABY, B.S.BHAVAN VEEDU, VEYILOOR VILLAGE, CHEMPAKAMANGALAM DESOM, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

BY ADVS. G.RANJU MOHAN M.SANTHI (K/868/2011)

¶13

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

¶14

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

¶15

2 ANUPRIYA V.M AGED 34 YEARS D/O.MANOHARAN P., RESIDING AT VASANTHA BHAVAN, INCHIPULLUVILA, MULLUVILA, ATHIYANNOOR VILLAGE, THIRUPURAM, MULLUVILA, NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM - 695 123.

¶16

BY ADV C.P.SABARI

¶17

PP.SRI RENJIT GEORGE,SR.GP

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶19

05.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.M.C. NO. 3494 OF 2021

¶21

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Crl.M.C has been filed seeking to quash further

¶24

proceedings in Crime No. 1055/2016 of Mangalapuram Police Station in C.C. No. 1541/2016 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Attingal.

¶25

1^st petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant

¶26

and 2^nd and 3^rd petitioners are in laws of the defacto complainant. It is alleged that, after the marriage of the defacto complainant with the 1^st petitioner, she was subjected to mental and physical torture demanding more dowry and thereby accused alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 34 of IPC.

¶27

Adv. C.P. Sabari appeared on behalf of the defacto complainant. The entire matrimonial issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant have been amicably settled. Annexure A1 is the certified copy of the final report, Annexure A2 is the affidavit duly sown in by the 2^nd respondent and Annexure A3 is the copy of the agreement executed between the parties.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor produced report of the the Sub Inspector of Police, Mangalapuram Police Station along with the the statement taken over mobile phone of the defacto complainant. The

¶29

Crl.M.C. NO. 3494 OF 2021

¶30

¶31

copy of the agreement produced from the side of the petitioners and the affidavit duly sworn in by the defacto complainant as well as the statement taken over phone recorded by the Station House Officer would reveal that the entire issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant have been amicably settled out of court. They are now living separately.

¶32

The issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant are purely private in nature and no public interest is involved. Since the entire issues between the petitioners and defacto complainant have been amicably settled, the continuation of further proceedings against the petitioners will be an abuse of process of court.. In the said circumstances, the entire proceeding in Crime No. 1055/2016 of Mangalapuram Police Station pending as C.C. No. 1541/2016 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Attingal is here by quashed.

¶33

In the result, this Crl.M.C. stands allowed.

SD/-

M.R.ANITHA

JUDGE

rps/

Crl.M.C. NO. 3494 OF 2021

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3494/2021

¶41

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶42

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY F THE FINAL REPORT DATED 28/09/2016 IN CRIME NO.1055 OF 2016 OF MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION. Annexure A2 AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE 1ST PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Shyamlal v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamlal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harikrishnan Vs State of Kerala

N.Abdul Gafoor Vs State of Kerala

Mahesh Vs the Station House Officer

Sreejith Unni, Vs State of Kerala

Shifana K.L. Vs State of Kerala

Gobinath Vs State of Kerala