Kerala High Court
Sunil vs State Of Kerala on 2 May, 2017
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MAY 2017/12TH VAISAKHA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 3129 of 2017 ()
---------------------------
IN CC 965/2012 of J.M.F.C.-II,NEYYATTINKARA
CRIME NO. 168/2012 OF POZHIYOOR POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
---------------------------------
SUNIL,
S/O.VELAYUDHAPANICKAR, AGED 46 YEARS, VALIYAVILA VEETTIL,
ARUMANOOR, TIRUPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
2. PRIYA,
D/O.NIRMALA, AGED 37 YEARS, N.K.NIVAS, THOZHUKKAL,
PERUMPAZHATHOOR VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695121
R2 BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 3129 of 2017 ()
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.168/12 OF
POZHIYOOR POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE B NOTARISED AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY 2ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
-----------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
dlk
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
-------------------------------------------
Crl. M. C. No. 3129 of 2017
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of May, 2017
O R D E R
The petitioner herein is the sole accused in C.C. No.965/2012 of the Judicial 1st Class Magistrate Court II, Neyyattinkara arising from Crime No.168/2012 of Pozhiyoor Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 498A IPC. The allegation of the prosecution is that, the 1st petitioner married the 2nd respondent on 30.08.2003 and thereafter the matrimonial relationship got strained. Alleging matrimonial cruelty, complaint was laid and crime was registered.
2. The petitioner has now approached this Court on a premise that, pending the proceedings the dispute has been resolved between the parties. An affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent reiterating the settlement arrived at between the parties. In the affidavit the wife has stated that she has settled the dispute with the petitioner herein and that she has no surviving grievance against the petitioner. She has also stated that, she has no objection in quashing the proceedings.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that the parties have resolved their disputes, the Crl. M. C. No. 3129 of 2017 2 statement of the defacto complainant has been recorded and that the petitioner is not involved in any other crime.
Having considered the nature of allegations, which essentially is one arising from a matrimonial discord, I feel that interest of justice demands giving a quietus to the matrimonial dispute. Hence, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C. No.965/2012 of the Judicial 1st Class Magistrate Court II, Neyyattinkara stand quashed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.
Pn