Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sivakumar, vs Ramya,

Sivakumar, vs RAMYA,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 26, 2021
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1600281

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.MC/605/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sivakumar,

Respondent

RAMYA,

Excerpt

.....a decree for divorce. therefore, this petition to quash the annexure a final report and all further proceedings in c.c. no. 766 of 2018 on the file of the judicial first class magistrate, chittur.4. learned counsel appearing for the 1strespondent/defacto complainant has submitted that she has absolutely no grievance or complaints against the petitioners. annexure b is the affidavit sworn to by her in support of the submission of the petitioners. the affidavit further indicates that she has no intention to pursue the matter further. 5. the learned public prosecutor has reported that the prosecution has no serious objection in allowing the petition. it is also submitted that as the dispute has been amicably settled, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and therefore, nouseful purpose would be served in proceeding with the case.6. heard both sides and perused the records.7. on hearing the submissions of all concerned, as well on consideration of the special facts and circumstances involved in this case, i find that nofruitful purpose is likely to be served by proceeding with the matter against the petitioners. moreover, no public interest is involved in the case and there is no legal impediment in granting the prayer as sought for by the petitioners. therefore, for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, this crl.m.c. is only to be allowed.for the foregoing reasons, annexure a final report and all further proceedings in c.c. no. 766 of 2018 on the file of the judicial first class magistrate, chittur arising from crime no.299 of 2018 of pudunagaram police station will stand quashed as prayed for. sd/- shircy v. judge sb appendix petitioner's/s exhibits: annexure-a certified copy of the final report in cc no.766/2018 on the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942 Crl.MC.No.605 OF 2021(E) CC 766/2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, CHITTUR CRIME NO.299/2018 OF Pudunagaram Police Station, Palakkad PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 AND 2: 1 SIVAKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS S/O.SWAMINATHAN, KK PUTHUR, MARUTHAKUTTITHERUVU, SAYIBABA COLONY, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU-641 001 2 PREMA, AGED 60 YEARS W/O.SWAMINATHAN, KK PUTHUR, MARUTHAKUTTITHERUVU, SAYIBABA COLONY, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU-641 001 BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT & STATE: 1 RAMYA, AGED 29 YEARS, D/O. SOMAKUMARA, NANDHANAM, KULAPPURA, ETHANNUR, PALAKKAD-678 501 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682 031 R1 BY ADV. UNNI SEBASTIAN KAPPEN OTHER PRESENT: SRI AJITH MURALI-PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 26th day of February 2021 Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 299 of 2018 of pudunagaram Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code now pending as C.C. No. 766 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the parties have resolved the entire disputes among themselves and as such there is

no subsisting dispute between them. The 1st petitioner and the 1st respondent got separated by a decree for divorce. Therefore, this petition to quash the Annexure A final report and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 766 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st

respondent/defacto complainant has                      submitted that she
has     absolutely no grievance or complaints against the
petitioners.            Annexure B is the affidavit sworn to by
her     in support of the submission                    of the petitioners.
The    affidavit         further         indicates       that   she   has    no
intention         to    pursue the matter further.
             5.     The learned Public Prosecutor has reported
that    the       prosecution      has       no   serious   objection        in
allowing the petition.              It is also          submitted that      as
the dispute has been amicably                     settled, the possibility
of conviction is remote and bleak and                       therefore,      no

useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the case.

6. Heard both sides and perused the records.

7. On hearing the submissions of all concerned, as well on consideration of the special facts and circumstances involved in this case, I find that no

fruitful purpose is likely to be served by proceeding with the matter against the petitioners. Moreover, no public interest is involved in the case and there is no legal impediment in granting the prayer as sought for by the petitioners. Therefore, for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, this Crl.M.C. is only to be allowed.

For the foregoing reasons, Annexure A final report and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 766 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur arising from Crime No.299 of 2018 of Pudunagaram Police Station will stand quashed as prayed for. Sd/- SHIRCY V. JUDGE sb APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC NO.766/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, CHITTUR ANNEXURE-B AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN EVIDENCING THE AFORESAID SETTLEMENT

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial