Manu a. vs State of Kerala

MANU A. vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided May 21, 2024

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1303863

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1303863
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice a. Badharudeen
Decided On: May 21, 2024
Case Number: Crl.MC/6691/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

MANU A.

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....code of criminal procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings against the petitioner/accused pursuant to annexure-i fir in crime no.2. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned public prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant.3. in this matter, the prosecution allegation is thatthe petitioner herein subjected the defacto complainant to sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage. further allegation is that the defacto complainant was subjected to miscarriage by the accused. thereby, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under sections 312, 376 (2)(n) and 450 of ipc.4. the learned counsel for the petitioner argued atlength to convince this court the petitioner is innocent and he submitted that, going by the allegation in the fis, it could be gathered that the sexual intercourse was consensual in nature. therefore, no offence punishable under section 376(2)(n) of ipc is made out.5. whereas, the learned public prosecutor opposed quashment of fir, since investigation is necessary to unearth the truth of the allegations.6. on perusal of the fis, two allegations are madeout. first one is sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage and second one is causing miscarriage of the defacto complainant’s pregnancy in a private hospital. thus, this is a matter which would require detailed investigation. therefore, this is not a fit case for quashment. accordingly, this petition stands dismissed with liberty to the investigating officer to go on with the investigation. all coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall stand stayed for a period of two weeks with direction to the petitioner to co-operate with the investigation and move for bail, in accordance with law.sd/- a. badharudeen judge sk appendix of crl.mc 6691/2021 petitioner annexures : annexure i a certified copy of fir in crime annexure ii a certified copy of fir in crime respondents’ annexures : nil

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 6691 OF 2021 CRIME NO.1414/2021 OF KEEZHVAIPUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: MANU A. AGED 31 YEARS S/O.BABU, MANJALLOORKUNNEL, VAIPOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV K.S.ARUNDAS RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2 XXXX BY ADV AUGUSTUS BINU PP - M P PRASANTH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 21st day of May, 2024 This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash all further proceedings against the petitioner/accused pursuant to Annexure-I FIR in Crime No.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant.

3. In this matter, the prosecution allegation is that

the petitioner herein subjected the defacto complainant to sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage. Further allegation is that the defacto complainant was subjected to miscarriage by the accused. Thereby, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 312, 376 (2)(n) and 450 of IPC.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued at

length to convince this Court the petitioner is innocent and he submitted that, going by the allegation in the FIS, it could be gathered that the sexual intercourse was consensual in nature. Therefore, no offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC is made out.

5. Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed quashment of FIR, since investigation is necessary to unearth the truth of the allegations.

6. On perusal of the FIS, two allegations are made

out. First one is sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage and second one is causing miscarriage of the defacto complainant’s pregnancy in a private hospital. Thus, this is a matter which would require detailed investigation. Therefore, this is not a fit case for quashment. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed with liberty to the Investigating Officer to go on with the investigation. All coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall stand stayed for a period of two weeks with direction to the petitioner to co-operate with the investigation and move for bail, in accordance with law.

Sd/- A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE SK APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6691/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURES : Annexure I A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME Annexure II A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES : NIL

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2024 Same Parties MANU A. vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice a. Badharudeen