Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VAYAKALA PARAMBIL SALIH versus THE STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


VAYAKALA PARAMBIL SALIH v. THE STATE OF KERALA - Crl MC No. 101 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 1766 (22 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 101 of 2007()

1. VAYAKALA PARAMBIL SALIH,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. KAMARIL LAILA, W/O.SALIH,

For Petitioner :SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF

For Respondent :SRI.K.MUHAMMED SALAHUDHEEN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :22/01/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 101 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2007

O R D E R

This petition is filed by the petitioner requesting that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the proceedings initiated against him under Section 498A I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police. The case was initially registered as Crime No.140 of 1999 of Ponnani Police Station. Later C.C.No. 57 of 2000 was registered on the basis of the final report. The petitioner has not appeared before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate. The case against him has been transferred to the list of long pending cases and it is numbered as L.P.no.22 of 2003.

2. The petitioner is the husband and the second respondent is the wife. The second respondent has entered appearance before this Court. The petitioner as well as the second respondent submit that the disputes between them have been settled amicably and that they are residing together harmoniously now. The case against the petitioner has in these circumstances lost its relevance and Crl.M.C.No. 101 of 2007 2 significance and the continuance of the said case is unnecessarily irritant in the matrimonial relationship between them. It is in these circumstances prayed that proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed, notwithstanding the fact that the offence is not compoundable, invoking the dictum in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386).

3. Having considered the submissions of the rival contestants and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am satisfied that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that no proceedings are pending before the learned Magistrate under Section 446 Cr.P.C. If any such proceedings is pending, it shall be disposed of by the learned Magistrate expeditiously.

4. This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. L.PNo.22 of 2003 pending before the J.F.C.M. Court, Ponnani is hereby quashed. (R. BASANT) Judge tm


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.