Petitioner, wife/complainant in husband's prosecution under the relevant penal code provision for cruelty, filed criminal revision petition challenging accused acquittal. Court dismissed petition following institutionalized settlement via Family Court under Hindu Marriage Act where petitioner agreed to withdraw.
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 DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA,
1944
CRL.REV.PET NO. 2961 OF 2009
CC.NO.892/2007 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,
KODUNGALLUR
REVISION PETITIONER/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
SREEDIVYA, D/O.KUMARA PANICKER, AGED 28 YEARS, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, EDATHURUTHY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DI, ST.
BY ADVS. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA
RESPONDENTS/STATE & ACCUSED:
BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN K.S.RAJESH
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.REV.PET NO. 2961 OF 2009
..2..
O R D E R
This Crl.Rev.Pet. has been preferred against the acquittal of the accused in a prosecution under Section 498A of IPC.
2. The wife/ de facto complainant is the revision petitioner. The husband/second respondent is the 1 st accused. The respondents 3 to 5 are the remaining accused. The respondent No.3 is no more.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the respondents 2, 4 and 5. There is no appearance for the revision petitioner.
4 . The learned counsel for the respondents 2, 4 and 5 submitted that the entire disputes between the parties have been settled. The learned counsel made available to me a copy of joint petition filed by the revision petitioner and the second respondent before the Family Court, Thrissur under Section 13B of the
CRL.REV.PET NO. 2961 OF 2009
Hindu Marriage Act. In Clause (4) of the said joint petition, the revision petitioner has agreed that she will withdraw this Criminal Revision Petition.
In view of the settlement, this Crl.Rev.Pet. is
dismissed.
Sd/-
DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH , JUDGE
AS
CRL.REV.PET NO. 2961 OF 2009
..4..
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE- I TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT KODUNGALLUR DATED 11.07.2007
ANNEXURE-AII TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.C.NO.892/2007 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KODUNGALLUR
SREEDIVYA D/O.KUMARA PANICKER
STATE OF KERALA
SUDEER S/O.UNNIPANICKER
UNNIPANICKER S/O.NARAYNAPANICKER
RUKMANI W/O.UNNIPANICKER
SUKESH S/O.UNNIPANICKER
KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
