Kerala High Court
Maneesh vs State Of Kerala on 10 July, 2017
Author: B.Sudheendra Kumar
Bench: B.Sudheendra Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2017/19TH ASHADHA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 4435 of 2017 ()
---------------------------
CRIME NO. 545/2016 OF CHERTHALA POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1:
--------------------------
MANEESH,
AGED 27,S/O. KUNJIRAMAN ACHARI,AMRUTHAYALAYAM,
KADANKODU,THURUTHI.P.O,HOSDURG TALUK,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REP.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM.
2. GAYATHRI,
D/O.JEEVA KUMARA,VELIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
C.M.C.30 CHERTHALA.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SHANES METHAR
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI E C BINEESH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-07-
2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 4435 of 2017 ()
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE J.F.C.M.COURT-1,CHERTHALA
ANNEXURE II CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R.IN CRIME NO.545/2016 OF
CHERTHALA POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
-----------------------
// True Copy //
PA to Judge
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C. No.4435 of 2017
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 10th day of July 2017
O R D E R
The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.545 of 2016 of Cherthala police station registered for the offences under Sections 68 and 67 of the Information Technology Act and Sections 498A, 420, 354, 354C, 441, 445, 427 and 500 read with Section 34 I.P.C.
2. Heard.
3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Public Prosecutor that the matter has been settled between the parties. The second respondent, who is the de-facto complainant, filed affidavit stating that the matter has been settled between the parties and hence, she has no further grievance against the petitioner. The above dispute arose Crl.M.C.4435/2017 -: 2 :- out of matrimonial relationship. Since the matter has been settled between the parties, quashing the said offences would secure the ends of justice. For the said reason, I am inclined to quash Annexure-II F.I.R. and further proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.545 of 2016 of Cherthala police station, in exercise of the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to meet the ends of justice and accordingly, I order so.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. stands allowed.
Sd/-
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE dl/10.7.2017