Allowed

Rajesh . K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Feb 2024Crl.MC/86/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in a dowry cruelty case filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and final report after settling the dispute with the de facto complainant. The court quashed the proceedings on the basis of the settlement affidavit, finding the dispute purely personal with no public interest involved.

What did the court decide?

Annexure A1 FIR in Crime No.1199/2021 and Annexure A2 final report in C.C. No.49/2022 quashed.

Rajesh . K Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 18TH MAGHA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 86 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST CRIME NO.1199/2021 OF Vadakara Police Station, Kozhikode and CC 49/2022

¶7

OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,VADAKARA

¶8

PETITIONERS:

¶9

1RAJESH . K
AGED 41 YEARS
S/O LATE KUNJIKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT NO.174, 6TH STREET,
ASSISI NAGAR, MADAVARAM, AMBATTUR TALUK, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT,
TAMIL NADU, PIN - 600060
2DEVI
AGED 65 YEARS
W/O KUNJIKRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT NO.174, 6TH STREET, ASSISI
NAGAR, MADAVARAM, AMBATTUR TALUK, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, TAMIL
NADU, PIN - 600060
3SANDHYA DINESH
AGED 35 YEARS
W/O DINESH, 7/40 GANDHI NAGAR 3RD STREET, SADUMANAGAR,
THIRUVATTIYUR, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 600019
BY ADVS.
ELDHO PAUL
TESSY JOSE

¶10

RESPONDENTS /STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶11

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682031
2THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
VADAKARA POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE, PIN -
673101
3AMRUTHA M
AGED 36 YEARS, D/O KARUNAKARA KURUP MANATHANATHU VEEDU,
CHERANDATHUR P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673541
BY ADV P.MAYA

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI. VIPIN NARAYANAN -SR.PP

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2024, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.M.C. No. 86 of 2023

¶16

..2..

¶17

SOPHY THOMAS, J.

¶18

=====================

¶19

Crl.M.C. No. 86 of 2023

¶20

========================

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Dated this the 07^th day of February , 2024

¶23

This Crl.M.C. under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is filed by

¶24

accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No. 1199 of 2021 of Vadakara police station, Kozikode, registered under Sections 498A, 406 r/w Section 34 of IPC for quashing Annexure-A1 FIR and Annexure-A2 final report in C.C. No. 49 of 2022 pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vatakara.

¶25

The prosecution allegation is that, petitioners subjected the defacto complainant to matrimonial cruelties, both mentally and physically, demanding more money and gold as dowry.

¶26

3 . When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned

¶27

counsel for the petitioners would submit that the matter stands

¶28

Crl.M.C. No. 86 of 2023

¶29

..3..

¶30

settled, and they produced Annexure-A3 affidavit of the 3^rd respondent, endorsing the factum of settlement, and further stating that, she has no intention to continue with the prosecution. She has no objection in quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 49 of 2022 pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vatakara.

¶31

Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the matter has been settled, and he produced the signed statement of the 3^rd respondent, to the effect that as the matter is settled, she has no objection in quashing the proceedings in C.C. No. 49 of 2022 pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vatakara.

¶32

Since the matter stands settled, no purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution against the petitioners.

¶33

6.In the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another; [(2012) 10 SCC 303)] , and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others; [(2019) 5 SCC 688], this Court is of the view that the

¶34

Crl.M.C. No. 86 of 2023

¶35

..4..

¶36

proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed on the basis of settlement. Moreover, the dispute is purely personal in nature, and no public interest is involved in it.

¶37

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure A1 FIR

¶38

and Annexure A2 final report in C.C. No. 49 of 2022 on the file

¶39

of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Vatakara stand quashed.

Sd/-

SOPHY THOMAS

JUDGE

RMV

Crl.M.C. No. 86 of 2023

¶45

..5..

¶46

	`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 86/2023`
`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`
`Annexure A1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1199/2021 OF`
	`VADAKARA POLICE DATED 11.11.2021 WITHOUT CMP`
`Annexure A2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL CHARGE SHEET SUBMITTED BY THE`
	`VADAKARA POLICE DATED 29.12.2021`
`Annexure A3`	`ADDITIONAL AFFIDAVIT OF AMRUTHA M DATED 29.09.2023`

¶47

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

¶48

TRUE COPY

¶49

P.A.TO JUDGE

Rajesh . K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh . K 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

Sushama Devi Vs State of Kerala

Jezwin Rasheed, Vs State of Kerala

Prem Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Biju Michael, Vs State of Kerala

Ashik, Vs State of Kerala

Sabeer P., Vs State of Kerala