Kerala High Court
Manu vs State Of Kerala on 4 August, 2016
Author: Sunil Thomas
Bench: Sunil Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/3RD BHADRA, 1938
Crl.MC.No. 5185 of 2016 ()
---------------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1335/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST
CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT- I, OTTAPPALAM
CRIME NO. 351/2014 OF SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
---------------------
MANU
AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.MURALIDHARAN,
KALPAKAM VEEDU, VETTEKARA, KADAMBAZHIPURAM,
OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT
BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
2. BEENA S
W/O.BABURAJAN, CHERUVARAMBATH HOUSE,
ALANGOD AMSOM, VETTEKARA DESOM,
OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT
R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.JEEVESH
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR:SMT M T SHEEBA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
25-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 5185 of 2016 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE AI COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT AND FIRST
INFORMATION STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 351/2014 SREEKRISHNAPURAM
POLICE STATION
ANNEXRUE A2 COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC.NO. 1335/2014 ON
THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, OTTAPALAM
ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT DATED 04.08.2016 SWORN TO AND EXECUTED
BY THE DEPONENT /2ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL
True Copy /
P A to Judge
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
=================
Crl.M.C.No.5185 of 2016
=================
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2016
ORDER
Petitioner herein is the sole accused in Crime No.351 of 2014 of Sreekrishnapuram Police Station for offences punishable under sections 452, 354, 506(1) of the Indian Penal Code and section 118(d) of Kerala Police Act.
2. The allegation of the prosecution is that the complainant was known to the accused and due to the previous relationship, he started blackmailing by stating that he was in possession of exclusive photographs of the de facto complainant. It is further alleged that on the date of incident, at about 7 p.m., accused trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and compelled her to follow him. Hence, complaint was laid. After investigation, final report was filed and is pending as C.C.No.1335 of 2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ottapalam evidenced by Annexure-A2. Annexure-A1 is the FIR given.
3. Crl.M.C is laid by the accused on a premise that the disputes between the parties have been amicably and voluntarily settled with the intervention of third parties. The second respondent has filed an affidavit as Annexure-A3. Learned counsel for the accused relying on Annexure-A3 submitted that she had no Crl.M.C.5185/16 2 objection in quashing the proceedings.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor who submitted that the petitioner herein is not involved in any other crime.
5. The allegation against the accused is serious. He is alleged to have threatened the complainant with certain photographs. He had, on an earlier occasion also, trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and had been interfering in the matrimonial relationship of the de facto complainant. However, having regard to the fact that the de facto complainant has now condoned the conduct and on the belief that the petitioner herein would mend his ways and that, he would not interfere in the family life of the de facto complainant, I am inclined to grant the relief sought for.
In the result, Crl.M.C is allowed. Entire proceedings in C.C.No.1335 of 2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ottapalam arising from Crime No.351 of 2014 of Sreekrishnapuram Police Station stand quashed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
Judge
Sbna/25/8/16
True Copy / P A to Judge