SRUTHY v. STATE OF KERALA

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1941** ## **Crl.MC.No. 3135 of 2018** **CRIME NO. 95/2018 OF Chavakkad Police Station , Thrissur** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **SRUTHY, AGED 37 YEARS, W/O. SAM GEORGE, D/O. SREENIVASAN,9/1, FIRST FLOOR, 18TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, BTM 1ST STAGE,BANGALURU, KARNATAKA 560 029.** **BY ADVS. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR SMT.MARY RESHMA GEORGE SMT.V.A.HARITHA SRI.JEEVAN RAJEEV SRI.K.ARJUN VENUGOPAL SRI.R.NANDAGOPAL** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 SRUTHY, D/O.SUBRAMANYAN, KONDARAPPASSERY HOUSE,CHITTATTUKARA, ELAVALLY, PAVARATTY,THRISSUR, PIN - 680511.** **2 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31.** ## **SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.06.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.2685/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1941** ## **Crl.MC.No. 2685 of 2019** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 484/2018 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, CHALAKUDY** **CRIME NO. 95/2018 OF Chavakkad Police Station , Thrissur** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **SRUTHY, AGED 37 YEARS, W/O. SAM GEORGE, D/O. SREENIVASAN, 9/1, FIRST FLOOR, 18TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS, BTM 1ST STAGE, BANGALURU, KARNATAKA- 560 29** **BY ADVS. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR SHRI. ANOOP KRISHNA SMT.MARY RESHMA GEORGE SRI.D.SREEKANTH SRI.K.ARJUN VENUGOPAL SRI.R.NANDAGOPAL SRI.SIDHARTH B PRASAD** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 SRUTHY, D/O. SUBRAMANYAN, KONDARAPPASSERY HOUSE, CHITTATTUKARA, ELAVALLY, PAVARATTY, THRISSUR, PIN-680 511** **2 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31.** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.06.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3135/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** ================== Crl.M.C.Nos.3135/2018 & 2685/2019 ================== Dated this the 3[rd] day of June, 2019 **O R D E R** The prayer in Crl.M.C.No. 3135/2018 filed under enabling provisions contained in Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, is as follows: _“.... to call for the records and set aside Annexure A-1 First Information Report as against the petitioner and allow this Criminal Miscellaneous Case.”_ The prayer in Crl.M.C.No. 2685/2019 is as follows: _“.... to call for the records and quash Annexure A-10 Final Report and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.484/2018 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the I Class, Chavakkad, as against the petitioner and allow this Criminal Miscellaneous Case.”_ 2. Both the abovesaid Criminal Miscellaneous Cases pertain to the very same impugned criminal proceedings filed by the very same accused. Crl.M.C.No.3135/2018 has been filed seeking quashment of the impugned FIR and this Court had granted stay of further proceedings in pursuance of the FIR registered in the crime on 1.8.2018. It appears that inadvertently the Police, without reference to the said stay order, has proceeded to complete the investigation and has filed final report/charge sheet in the said crime. In such circumstances, the petitioner has filed Criminal Miscellaneous Case, Crl.M.C.No.2685/2019, for quashment of the impugned final report/charge sheet in respect of the said crime, Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 4 :- which has led to the institution of the Calendar Case, C.C.No. 484/ 2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad. In the light of these aspects, these two petitions are disposed on the basis of the common order. 3. The petitioner accused No.4 in Anx.A-1 FIR in Crime No. 95/2018 of Chavakkad Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Secs.406 and 498A of the I.P.C., on the basis of a private criminal complaint filed by the 2[nd] respondent herein before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chavakkad, in which the said Magistrate had directed the Police to conduct investigation as per Sec.156(3) of the Cr.P.C., which led to the registration of the abovesaid crime. The Police, after investigation, has filed the impugned final report/charge sheet (produced as Anx. A- 10 in Crl.M.C.No. 2685/2019), which had led to the institution Calendar Case, C.C.No. 484/2018 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Chavakkad. Accused No.1 is the husband of the lady defacto complainant and the others are his close relatives. It is stated that the marriage of the petitioner's brother (A-1) and the defacto complainant was on 18.1.2017. The petitioner (A-4) is the Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 5 :- sister of A-1 (husband). It is alleged that A-1 and A-2 & A-3 (husband's parents) had misappropriated gold ornaments and harassed demanding more dowry. It is further stated that the petitioner's husband is a Christian and the petitioner, who belonged to Hindu faith, had later embraced Christian faith after her marriage and she has been living in Bangalore along with her husband for the last nine years. It is stated that since the petitioner had married outside her religious community, she has been rather forced to keep away from her parents and other relatives and that she has even not attended the function in relation to the marriage of her brother (A-1) with the lady defacto complainant, which was on 18.1.2017. Further that she was under post natal treatment in Bangalore where she is employed and staying with her husband. That she delivered a baby girl and was undergoing regular medical treatment. Anx. A-2 is the certificate issued by the church attended to by petitioner and her husband, wherein it is stated that the petitioner, who is regularly attending the said church and she has been living in Bangalore for the last 9 years, etc. The petitioner is working as a software engineer at Bangalore as evident from Anx. A-4. That the petitioner has been under treatment as discernible from Anxs. A6 and A-7 produced in Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 6 :- Crl.M.C.No. 3135/2018. It is the case of the petitioner that the lady defacto complainant has unnecessarily made incorrect and false allegations as against the petitioner (A-4) only for strengthening her case against her husband and inlaws and that the continuation of the impugned proceedings is noting but grave abuse of the process of the court and is liable to be interdicted by this Court. 4. Though contesting respondent No.1 (lady defacto complainant) has been served in both these cases, she has not entered appearance. ## 5. Sec. 498A of the I.P.C. reads as follows: _“_ _**Sec. 498A.: Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty** .- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine._ _Explanation.-- For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means --_ - _(a) Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or_ - _(b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.”_ 6. The main allegations to the extent that is relatable to the petitioner (A-4) are given on the second paragraph of page 5 of Anx. A-1 FIR (produced in both the Crl.M.Cs.), wherein it is alleged that the petitioner (A-4) had also attended the marriage between the lady Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 7 :- defacto complainant and the brother of A-4 and that on Diwali holidays she had come to her house and had talked to the lady defacto complainant in an insulting manner and that the lady defacto complainant was told by her that unless she brings more gold ornaments, it is not possible for her to reside in the matrimonial home, etc. 7. Going by the impugned prosecution materials, it can be seen that by no stretch of imagination the abovesaid allegations raised against the petitioner (A-4) can even remotely satisfy the requirements of the ingredients of clause (a) of the Explanation to Sec.498A, which says that the said willful conduct should be such of a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman. The abovesaid allegations are quite vague and it cannot be said that the said allegations would amount to causing of harassment on the lady with a view to coercing her or any person related to her meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security, etc., as envisaged in clause (b) of Sec.498A. Of course, the defacto complainant has Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 8 :- made very generalised allegation in the complaint that the accused (presumably including A-4 as well) had committed cruelty and harassment on her. 8. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to take the view that the abovesaid allegations have been made as against A-4 only for the sake of making such allegations so as to array the petitioner also as an accused among the various accused persons in the abovesaid case. It has to be borne in mind that the petitioner and her parents belong to Hindu religion and the petitioner had married outside the community and had later embraced Christian faith and has been residing in Bangalore for the last 9 to 10 years and it is quite reasonable to infer that she would have been kept away from the parental home due to the fact that she has married outside the religious community. The said factual submission made by the petitioner need not be disbelieved and if that be so, it is only all the more reasonable to infer that the petitioner would not have in any manner interfered with the marital life of her brother. It appears that the petitioner's brother and wife had Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 9 :- set up her marital home in the State of Kerala. 9. It has been held by the Apex Court in the case _**Shakson Belthissor v. State of Kerala and another**_ reported in (2009) 14 SCC 466 that where a complaint is found to be vexatious or frivolous or oppressive, the power under Sec.482 Cr.P.C could be fittingly exercised to quash such impugned criminal proceedings. In the case _**State of Orissa through Kumar Raghvendra Singh and others v. Ganesh Chandra Jew**_ reported in (2004) 8 SCC 40, the Apex Court has held that the impugned criminal proceedings can be quashed where the complaint involves malafides. In the case _**Lambodaran Nair v. State of Kerala**_ reported in 2003 (1) KLT SN 115 Case No.83 (SC) it has been held by the Apex Court that the power under Sec.482 Cr.PC can be exercised where criminal proceedings were manifestly attended with malafides or to wreck personal vengeance. In the case _**Om Prakash v. State of Jharkhand**_ reported in (2012) 12 SCC 72, the Supreme Court has categorically held that if it appears to the trained judicial mind that continuance of a prosecution will lead to abuse of process of Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 10 :- law or miscarriage of justice, the power under Sec.482 of Cr.P.C. must be exercised and the proceedings must be quashed. 10. In the light of the abovesaid aspects, this Court is inclined to take the view that the petitioner has made out a strong, credible and believable case that the allegations raised against her are incorrect and false and that the said allegations against her are only to array her also as an accused as she is one of the close relatives of the husband of the lady defacto complainant. In the above circumstances, this Court feels that the inherent powers under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings could be invoked in the instant case. Accordingly, it is ordered that in the interest of justice that the impugned final report/charge sheet filed in Crime No. 95/2018 of Chavakkad Police Station, (produced as Anx. A-10 in Crl.M.C.No.2628/ 2019) which has led to the institution of Calendar Case, C.C.No. 484/2018 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Chavakkad, to the limited extent it is directed as against the petitioner (A-4) and all further proceedings taken in pursuance Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 11 :- of thereof to the limited extent it directed as against the petitioner (A-4), will stand quashed. The petitioner will produce certified copies of this order before the investigating officer concerned and the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Chavakkad. The office of the Advocate General will forward certified copy of this order the investigating officer for necessary information. With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous Cases will stand finally disposed of. Sd/sdk+ **ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE** Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 12 :- ## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 3135/2018** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** - **ANNEXURE A1. CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ALONG WITH THE AFORESAID PRIVATE COMPLAINT.** - **ANNEXURE A2. A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 11.04.2018 ISSUED BY EBENEZER BRETHREN ASSEMBLY, MADIWALA, BANGALORE.** - **ANNEXURE A3. A TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY MARRIAGE REGISTRAR, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY DATED 05.11.2014.** - **ANNEXURE A4. A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE 16.04.2018 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER HR OF THE COMPANY.** - **ANNEXURE A5. A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED BY THE FORTIS HOSPITAL LTD., BANGALORE.** - **ANNEXURE A6. TRUE COPY OF THE PHYSIOTHERAPY ADVICE DATED 08.09.2015 ISSUED BY THE PHYSIOTHERAPIST, PORTEA.** - **ANNEXURE A7. A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL PRESCRIPTION DATED 19.02.2018 BY THE PRITHVY HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.** - **ANNEXURE A8. A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2018 IN CRL.M.C.NO.399 OF 2018 OF THE COURT OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE, THRISSUR.** Crl.M.C.3135/18 & 2685/19 - : 13 :- ## **APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 2685/2019** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT ALONG WITH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT.** **ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 11.04.2018 ISSUED BY EBENEZER BRETHREN ASSEMBLY.** - **ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY MARRIAGE REGISTRAR, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY DATED 05.11.2014.** - **ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE 16.4.2018 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER HR OF THE COMPANY.** - **ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY ISSUED BY THE FORTIS HOSPITAL LTD, BANGALORE.** - **ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE PHYSIOTHERAPY ADVICE DATED 8.9.2015 ISSUED BY THE PHYSIOTHERAPIST, PORTEA.** - **ANNEXURE A7 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL PRESCRIPTION DATED 19.2.2018 BY THE PRITHVY HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.** - **ANNEXURE A8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.3.2018 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 399 OF 2018 OF THE COURT OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE, THRISSUR.** - **ANNEXURE A9 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.8.2018 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 3135/2018 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT.** **ANNEXURE A10 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 95/2018 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.**