Allowed

Girish Mon M v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Nov 2021Crl.MC/3959/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On the husband's and wife's (mother of petitioner 1) application, the High Court of Kerala quashed further criminal proceedings following an amicable settlement of matrimonial disputes and mutual divorce filing, deeming continued prosecution an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings pending against the petitioners in crime No.404/2021 of Arthungal police station are quashed.

Girish Mon M 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

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 20TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 3959 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.404/2021 OF ARTHUNGAL POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1GIRISH MON M
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O LATE P.P.MANIYAPPAN,
KARTHIKA SADHANAM,
KURUPPAMKULANGARA P.O,
CHETHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688539.

¶9

2SAROJINI P.
AGED 74 YEARS
W/O LATE P P MANIYAPPAN,
KARTHIKA SADHANAM, KURUPPAMKULANGARA P.O,
CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688539.

¶10

BY ADVS.
K.S.ARUN KUMAR
AMRUTHA P S

¶11

RESPONDENTS /STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶13

2PRAVITHA L
AGED 33 YEARS
D/O RATHEESHKUMAR, PRVEEN NIVAS,
VARANAD P.O, THANNERMUKKOM,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688527

¶14

BY ADV RAJEE P MATHEWS
BY ADV SANGEETHARAJ N.R, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

CRL.MC NO. 3959 OF 2021

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This Crl.M.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire further proceedings against the petitioners in crime No.404/2021 of Arthungal police station which has been registered for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 506(i) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The first petitioner is the husband of the second respondent/ the defacto complainant and the second petitioner is the mother of the first petitioner.

¶20

Annexure I is the certified copy of the FIR. The parties have amicably settled the entire issues as per an agreement, copy of which is produced as Annexure II. Annexure III is the affidavit sworn in by the defacto complainant.

¶21

The parties have decided to separate their marital relationship and decided to file a petition for mutual divorce as per Annexure II agreement.

¶22

Adv.Rajee P.Mathews appeared on behalf of the defacto complainant. She reports about the settlement arrived at between

¶23

¶24

CRL.MC NO. 3959 OF 2021

¶25

the parties.

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor produced copy of the report of the SHO, Arthungal police station along with copy of the statement of the defacto complainant. In the statement given to the SHO, the defacto complainant/the second respondent categorically stated that 105 sovereigns of gold ornaments and amount have been received on 25.08.2021 at Cherthala CPIM Area Committee office and she is not interested to prosecute the matter further against the petitioners.

¶27

It has come out from the affidavit duly sworn in by the defacto complainant as well as the statement of the defacto complainant given to the SHO that the entire matrimonial issues have been amicably settled out of court and they have also decided to separate the marital relationship by due process of court. The defacto complainant is also not intending to prosecute the matter further against the petitioners.

¶28

Since the entire matrimonial issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant have been amicably settled, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners

¶29

¶30

CRL.MC NO. 3959 OF 2021

¶31

would be an abuse of process of court. The issues between the parties are purely private in nature and no public interested is involved. So, I do not find any impediment in quashing the further proceedings against the petitioners.

¶32

In the result, the Crl.M.C. allowed and all further proceedings pending against the petitioners in crime No.404/2021 of Arthungal police station, is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA

JUDGE

nkr

CRL.MC NO. 3959 OF 2021

¶38

¶39

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3959/2021

¶40

PETITIONER ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE-ICERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME
NO.404/2021 OF ARTHUMNGAL POLICE
STATION DATED 26.06.2021.
ANNEXURE-IIA TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT
ARRANGEMENT DATED 25/08/2021.
ANNEXURE-IIIAFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Girish Mon M v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girish Mon M 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam C. Vs State of Kerala

Jino Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Sharan, Vs State of Kerala

Damodaran Pillai, Vs Radhamaniamma

Hridya Ramesh Vs State of Kerala

Arun I.S Vs State of Kerala