Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BINOY, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVAN versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


BINOY, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVAN v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - Crl MC No. 1168 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 7628 (12 April 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 1168 of 2007()

1. BINOY, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVAN,
... Petitioner

2. VASUDEVAN, AGED 62 YEARS,

3. GIRIJA AGED 61 YEARS, W/O.VASUDEVAN,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

2. RUBY, AGED 24 YEARS,

For Petitioner :SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH

For Respondent :SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :12/04/2007

O R D E R

R. BASANT, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Crl.M.C.No. 1168 of 2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 12th day of April, 2007

O R D E R

The petitioners are the husband and parents-in-law of the second respondent/defacto complainant. On the complaint of the defacto complainant, a crime was registered and investigation was conducted by the police. Final report has been filed and cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate.

2. The petitioners have now come before this court with a prayer that the proceedings against them may be quashed invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In as much as the disputes between the spouses have been settled amicably and harmony has returned to the matrimony, it is prayed that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may be invoked to prematurely terminate the proceedings, which has now lost its relevance and meaning.

3. The 2nd respondent has entered appearance through counsel. A copy of an affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent is produced as Annex.2. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent confirms that the matter has been settled and the parties have now resumed Crl.M.C.No. 1168 of 2007 2 cohabitation. I am satisfied that the matter has been settled between the parities and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant has compounded the offences alleged against the petitioners. The composition can be accepted, if the same is legally permissible.

4. The offence under Section 498A I.P.C. is not compoundable. But the learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the decision in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386). The said decision is authority for the proposition that at times the interests of justice may transcend the interests of mere law and in such circumstances the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. cannot be reckoned as a fetter on the sweeping powers of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to act in aid of justice. I am satisfied that the dictum therein is squarely applicable and can be invoked to prematurely terminate the proceedings against the first petitioner.

5. This Crl.M.C. is hence allowed. C.C.No. 913 of 2006 pending before the J.F.C.M. Court, Kodungallur, 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.