Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

P.v.Dasan Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2022)

Home
Kerala HC
2022
P.v.Dasan Vs State of KeralaP.v.Dasan v. State of Kerala

Allowed

P.v.Dasan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Nov 2022Crl.MC/3905/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recognition of this case as

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings in CC No. 5/2014 against the petitioners alone stands quashed.

What the court decided

AI extract

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

WEDNESDAY, THE 28^th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA,

1944

CRL.MC NO. 3905 OF 2019

CC 5/2014 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PAYYANNUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

1 P.V.DASAN, AGED 62 YEARS S/O. LATE A. K. BHASKARAN, 'AYSWARYA', SURABHI NAGAR, MAMBALAM, PAYYANNUR P.O., THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.

2 P.V. NIRMALA, D/O LATE A.K. BHASKARAN, KOTTI P.O, PAYYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT

BY ADV M.V.AMARESAN

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether a prosecution under Section 498A IPC lies when there is no valid marriage between the accused and the complainant.
2.
Whether criminal proceedings should continue when the marriage in question has been declared void by a competent court.

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

Unnikrishnan @ Chandu v. State of KeralaRelied on¶36
Unnikrishnan @ Chandu v. State of Kerala (2017 (4) KHC 356)
Suprabha v. State of KeralaRelied on¶36

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
P.V.DASAN & ANR
respondent
STATE OF KERALA
respondent
RAJITHA DAS

Coram

AI extract

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Kerala HC
Decided on: 28 Nov 2022 · November
Registered: 6 Jun 2019
Case no.: Crl.MC/3905/2019

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Kauser Edappagath

Shon Panicker Vs State of Kerala
25 Nov 2022
Sreekumar Vs Pushpa Vijayan
25 Nov 2022
Santhoshkumar Vs State of Kerala
25 Nov 2022
Abdulla Vs the State of Kerala
28 Nov 2022
Dr. P.K. Mohammed Bappu Vs Saleema Parveen

Cite this judgement

P.v.Dasan v. State of Kerala, Crl.MC/3905/2019 (KL), decided on 28 November 2022.

The High Court of Kerala publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited2

Unnikrishnan @ Chandu v. State of KeralaRelied on¶36
Suprabha v. State of KeralaRelied on¶36

Open Authorities

Outcome

Further proceedings in CC No. 5/2014 against the petitioners alone stands quashed.

Issue for consideration

Whether a prosecution under Section 498A IPC lies when there is no valid marriage between the accused and the complainant. +1 more

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

A criminal prosecution under Section 498A of the Penal Code requires proof of a valid marriage between the accused and the complainant. This Court quashed the criminal proceedings against petitioners since a competent court had previously held that their marriage was void and non-existent, referencing key precedents on Article 14 and Section 483 of Evidence Act.

A compact analysis

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.

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

2 RAJITHA DAS, AGED 51,D/O. RADHA, KAIRALI ROAD, KELOTH, PAYYANNUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 307.

BY ADV SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI

SRI SANGEETHA RAJ-PP

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.M.C.No.3905/2019

-:2:-

O R D E R

Dated this the 28^th day of November, 2022

This Crl.M.C has been filed to quash Annexure 2 final report

in CC No.5/2014 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur.

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2. The 2^nd respondent is the defacto complainant. The offence alleged is punishable u/s 498A r/w 34 of IPC.

The prosecution case in short is that the 2^nd respondent was subjected to cruelty both physically and mentally demanding more dowry by the petitioners and the 3^rd accused.

I have heard Sri.M.V.Amaresh, the learned counsel for

the petitioners, Sri. T.V. Jayakumar Namboodiri, the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent and Sri.Sangeetha Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned prosecution will not lie in as much as there is no valid marriage between the 1^st petitioner and the 2^nd respondent.

The crime was registered pursuant to a private complaint filed by

the 2^nd respondent at the Judicial First class Magistrate Court,

Crl.M.C.No.3905/2019

-:3:-

Payyannur. The learned Magistrate forwarded the complaint to the police for investigation under Section 154 of Cr.P.C. It was thereafter the crime was registered. Annexure 1 is the complaint. In the complaint, the allegation is that the 1^st petitioner legally married the 2^nd respondent on 19/6/1987. There was some previous litigation between the parties as OP No.662/2013, OP No.83/2014 and MC Nos.313/2013 at the Family Court, Kannur. In the said cases, the 2^nd respondent admitted that the petitioner has married one Pankajakshy before the 1^st petitioner married the 2^nd respondent and that the marriage of the 1^st petitioner with the 2^nd respondent was during the subsistence of the marriage with Pankajakshy. Considering these admitted facts, the Family Court in the common judgment in OP No.662/2013, OP No. 83/2014 and MC 313/2013 has found that the marriage of the 1^st petitioner with the 2^nd respondent was void since it was solemnized during the subsistence of the marriage of the 1^st petitioner with one Pankajakshy. Annexure 3 is the said judgment. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said judgment has become final. Thus, there is a verdict of a competent court of law that there is no

Crl.M.C.No.3905/2019

-:4:-

legal and valid marriage between the 1^st petitioner and the 2^nd respondent.

6. This Court in Unnikrishnan @ Chandu v. State of

Kerala (2017 (4) KHC 356) and in Suprabha v. State of Kerala (2013 (3) KLT 514) has held that for a prosecution u/s 498A of IPC, there must be a valid marriage. Further, the learned counsel for the 2^nd respondent submitted that now there is no dispute between the 1^st petitioner and the 2^nd respondent and they are living together. Hence, I am of the view that no purpose will be served in proceeding further against the petitioners and all further proceedings in CC No.5/2014 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur against the petitioners alone hereby stands quashed.

Crl.M.C. is allowed.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

kp

Crl.M.C.No.3905/2019

-:5:-

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3905/2019

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE - 1 TRUE COPY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINT CMP.NO.3325/2013 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, PAYYANNUR DATED 31.07.2013. ANNEXURE - 2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY PAYYANNUR POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO.795/2013. ANNEXURE -3 TRUE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT PASSED BY FAMILY COURT, KANNUR IN O.P 663/2013, 83/2014AND M.C. 313/2013 DATED 24.06.2018.

Suprabha v. State of Kerala (2013 (3) KLT 514)

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 2 enactments

AI extract

IPC498A34
CrPC154

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

CNR

KLHC010397252019

Topic

Matrimonial and Divorce

Bench

Kauser Edappagath

Disposal

ALLOWED

28 Nov 2022

Abdul Savad Vs State of Kerala

28 Nov 2022

Statutes3

IPC498A · 34
CrPC154

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

Parties & counsel