Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Petitioners are accused in C.C No.1146/2011 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Karungappally.
2. Facts in brief, are as follows :
Chavara Police Station registered Crime No.745/2011 under Section 498A r/w Section 34 IPC on the allegation made by the second and the third respondents that the first petitioner married the second respondent and during their marital life, the petitioners made the second respondent's life miserable by harassing her physically and mentally. Annexure V is the first information report and the first information statement in this case. Annexure IX is the final report filed by the police after investigation.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. I have perused the records.
4. Specific case of the complainants/respondents is that the accused married the second respondent on 11/11/2010. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the second and third respondents that the marriage was registered with S.N.D.P. Yogam. In Annexure V clear allegations are made that the petitioners together harassed the second respondent demanding more dowry and money.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner never married the second respondent. It is an admitted fact, according to the learned counsel, that there was a betrothal ceremony between the first petitioner and the second respondent on 27-10-2010. However, no marriage took place thereafter, contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is also submitted that second respondent actually married one Shailesh. Annexure VII is the invitation letter for the marriage between the second respondent and Shailesh . It is seen from Annexure VII that they married on 19-04-2012. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that an issue is born in the relationship. Annexure VIII is the marriage certificate produced to show that the second respondent was married to Shailesh on 19-04-2012. Learned counsel for the second and third respondents has no case that this marriage took place after dissolving the marriage of the second respondent with the first petitioner. This probabilises the case of the petitioners that there was no marriage between the first petitioner and the second respondent. Learned counsel produced a copy of the judgment of Family Court, Chavara in O.P(HMA) No.1350/2013. That was a case filed by the first petitioner against the second respondent and her husband Shailesh. On perusal of the judgment, it can be seen that though the respondents entered appearance and filed objection before the Family Court, later they did not turn up and they were set ex parte. The Family Court, after considering the evidence produced before it, allowed the original petition declaring that there was no marital relationship between the first petitioner and the second respondent. Reckoning all these facts, I find that the prosecution against the petitioners in Crime No.745/2011 is an abuse of the process of the court. Therefore, the power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C has to be invoked in this case.
In the result, Annexure V first information report and first information statement and Annexure IX final report are hereby quashed.
All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed.
Sd/- A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.
//True Copy// P.A to Judge amk