Disposed

Sanoop Eranjivalappil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Feb 2024Crl.MC/353/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court stayed a criminal trial under Section 498A IPC arising from alleged marital cruelty. Relying on a citizen's case principle, the court held that without a valid marital relationship, no prosecution for 498A can proceed. Consequently, the criminal trial is stayed pending the determination of the validity of the marriage by the Family Court in a related petition.

What did the court decide?

Stay on trial; direction to Family Court to dispose of O.P. No.260 of 2022 within 4 months.

Sanoop Eranjivalappil Vs State of Kerala — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

 PRESENT

¶3

 THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS

¶4

 MONDAY, THE 26 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

 CRL.MC NO. 353 OF 2024

¶6

 CRIME NO.0382/2022 OF Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode

¶7

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.391 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL
 MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,PERAMBRA

¶8

 PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 SANOOP ERANJIVALAPPIL AGED 37 YEARS S/O VASU, KURIYADI (ERANJIVALAPPIL) HOUSE, AYANIKKAD P.O, IRINGAL, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673521

¶10

2 VASU AGED 69 YEARS S/O KANNAN KURIYADI (ERANJIVALAPPIL) HOUSE, AYANIKKAD P.O, IRINGAL, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673521

¶11

3 LEELA AGED 61 YEARS W/O VASU, KURIYADI (ERANJIVALAPPIL) HOUSE, AYANIKKAD P.O, IRINGAL, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673521

¶12

BY ADVS. SRINATH GIRISH P.JERIL BABU PRASUDHA.S

¶13

 RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶14

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

¶15

2 AMRITHA DHARMARAJ AGED 28 YEARS D/O DHARMARAJ, KURIKKALKOLLI HOUSE, MATTANOD, KOORACHUNDU P.O, KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673527

¶16

BY ADV C.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶17

 CRL.MC NO.353 OF 2024

¶18

¶19

 CRL.MC NO.353 OF 2024

¶20

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Dated this the 26^th day of February , 2024

¶23

This Crl.M.C., under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 in crime No.382 of 2022 of Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode, for quashing Annexure A4 final report in C.C.No.391 of 2022 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perambra.

¶24

Crime No.382 of 2022 was registered by Perambra Police Station on the basis of a complaint made by the 2nd respondent alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A of IPC. According to her, the petitioners are her husband and parents in law, and her marriage with the 1st petitioner was solemnized on 12.09.2021 at Payyoli Sree Mahavishnu Temple. After

¶25

¶26

 CRL.MC NO.353 OF 2024

¶27

marriage, the petitioners subjected her to matrimonial cruelties, and hence she filed a complaint against them.

¶28

On the other hand, the petitioners would contend that there was no legal marriage between the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent, as the first marriage of the 2nd respondent was subsisting, when she entered into a marital relationship with the first petitioner. Annexure A1 decree of Family Court, Vadakara in O.P.No.332 of 2021 is produced by the petitioners, to show that the marriage between the 2nd respondent and her first husband was dissolved on mutual consent only on 24.03.2022. But she married the first petitioner on 12.09.2021, ie. before dissolving her marriage with her previous husband. So the first petitioner filed O.P.No.260 of 2022 before Family Court, Vadakara to declare his marriage with the 2nd respondent as null and void. That O.P. is pending consideration of the Family Court, Vadakara. The 2nd

¶29

¶30

 CRL.MC NO.353 OF 2024

¶31

respondent entered appearance in that O.P. and she is contesting that O.P.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners relying on the decision of this Court in Narayanan v. State of Kerala [2023 (6) KHC 427] would submit that for a prosecution under Section 498A of IPC, there must be a valid marital relationship between the accused and the victim. Therefore, only a legally wedded wife can claim the protection under Section 498A of IPC, and in the absence of such a legal relationship as husband and wife, there cannot be a conviction under Section 498A of IPC.

¶33

Since the validity of marriage between the first petitioner and the 2nd respondent is under consideration of Family Court, Vadakara, before deciding that issue, it may not be fair to proceed with the prosecution under Section 498A of IPC against the petitioners. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to issue a direction to the Family Court, Vadakara, to dispose O.P.No.260 of 2022

¶34

¶35

 CRL.MC NO.353 OF 2024

¶36

at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶37

Till O.P.No.260 of 2022 is disposed of by the Family Court, Vadakara, deciding as to the validity of the marriage between the first petitioner and the 2nd respondent, the trial in C.C.No.391 of 2022 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perambra, shall stand stayed.

¶38

Registry of this Court is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Family Court, Vadakara and also to Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Perambra, for compliance and report.

¶39

With these directions, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

¶40

Sd/SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE

¶41

SSK/26/02

¶42

 CRL.MC NO.353 OF 2024

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 353/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶45

Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 24-03-2022 IN O.P NO.332/2021 OF THE FAMIY COURT, VADAKARA

¶46

Annexure A2 A TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 20-03-2022 IN O.P 260/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA

¶47

Annexure A3 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO. 0382/2022 DATED 2-07-2022 OF THE PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

¶48

Annexure A4 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN FIR NO. 0382/2022 DATED 30-07-2022 OF THE PERAMBRA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE., IN C.C. NO. 391/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I, PERAMBRA

¶49

Annexure A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE 161 STATEMENTS IN CRIME NO. 0382/2022 OF PERAMBRA POLICE

Sanoop Eranjivalappil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanoop Eranjivalappil 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Kareem Vs State of Kerala

Pradeep Kumar K.v., Vs State of Kerala

Pradeepkumar K.v., Vs State of Kerala

Jaison Varghese, Vs State of Kerala

Hakkem Vs State of Kerala

Sayooj, Vs Arya Krishna