Allowed

Antony Peter, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Nov 2021Crl.MC/4860/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition to quash ongoing criminal proceedings under IPC Sections 323, 326, and 498A. Based on a final report and a settlement agreement where the wife-thirds the incidence of the complaint, the Court held that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process as the matter is purely personal with no public interest.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings in C.C.No.699/2019 against the petitioner were quashed due to a mutual settlement.

Antony Peter, 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

MONDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 4860 OF 2021

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 699/2019 (ERSTWHILE CC NO.1055/2014) OF

¶7

JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PAYYANNUR CRIME NO.699/2019 OF PERINGOM POLICE STATION

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

ANTONY PETER, AGED 51 YEARS S/O. MARY PETER, EMPLOYED IN GULF, ONAKKAVIL HOUSE, KANICHAR AMSOM DESOM, IRITTY TALUK, P.O., MALAYAMAPADI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. P.SAJU R.SUDHEER R.PRATHEESH (ARANMULA) RAJEESH V.R. K.N.RAJANI

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE/COMPLAINANTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OFFICE OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, 682 031. 2 JASEENTHA .K @ SIJI, AGED 37 YEARS D/O. GOPINATHAN PELLAI, VADAKKEDATH HOUSE, KUTTOOR AMSOM, DESOM, P.O., KUTTOOR, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT 670 101. BY ADV JISHA P.C.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

PP RENJIT GEORGE,SR GP

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.M.C.No.4860 of 2021 2

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This Crl.M.C. has been filed seeking to quash the entire further proceedings in C.C.No.699/2019 (Erstwhile CC No.1055/2014) on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur in crime No.417/2014 of Peringome Police Station, which is registered for the offences punishable u/s.323, 326 and 498A IPC.

¶18

Petitioner is the sole accused in the above crime. Second respondent is the defacto complainant, who is none other than the wife of the petitioner.

¶19

Annexure AI is the certified copy of FIR in the above crime. Annexure-2 is the copy of Final Report and Annexure 3 is the agreement of settlement arrived at between the parties. Annexure 4 is the affidavit sworn in by the second respondent – defacto complainant stating about the settlement of dispute.

¶20

Adv.Smt. Jisha P.C. appeared on behalf of the 2^nd respondent - defacto complainant. She reports about the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor produced statement of facts submitted by the SHO, Peringome Police Station along with the copy of the signed statement of the defacto complainant.

¶22

Crl.M.C.No.4860 of 2021 3

¶23

It has come out from the statement given to the SHO as well as the copy of signed statement of the defacto complainant and Annexure 4 affidavit that the entire matrimonial issues between the petitioner and the defacto complainant have been amicably settled and she is not intending to prosecute the matter further against the petitioner and she has no objection in quashing the FIR in crime No.417/2014 against the petitioner.

¶24

Since the parties have amicably settled the entire issues, there is no impediment in quashing the proceedings against the petitioner and further continuance of the proceedings against him will be an abuse of process of court. No public interest is involved and the issue is purely personal in nature. Therefore, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to quash the entire proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.699/2019 (Erstwhile CC No.1055/2014) on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur in crime No.417/2014 of Peringome Police Station. It is ordered accordingly.

¶25

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

¶26

M.R.ANITHA

¶27

shg

¶28

Crl.M.C.No.4860 of 2021 4

¶29

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4860/2021

¶30

PETITIONER ANNEXURE
Annexure 1	CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 417/2014 OF PERINGOME POLICE STATION.
Annexure 2	TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 417/2014 OF PERINGOME POLICE STATION DATED 07/08/2014.
Annexure 3	TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT OF SETTLEMENT DATED 03/07/2019.
Annexure 4	THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT DATED 04/03/2020 EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Antony Peter, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antony Peter, 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

Jamsheer, Vs the State of Kerala

Kurien Jose Vs State of Kerala

Gokul Divakar @ Nikhil Vs State of Kerala

Shijin Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs the State of Kerala

Muhammed Basheer Vs State of Kerala