IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2176 of 2008()
1. SUDHEENDRAN, S/O.NEELAKANDAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. RATHI, D/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 54 YEARS,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC
For Petitioner :SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :10/06/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 2176 of 2008
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of June, 2008
ORDER
The petitioner is a 74 year old person, whose wife, by a
latter marriage, has filed a private complaint alleging offences
punishable, inter alia, under Sec.498A of the IPC. According to
the petitioner, there is no legal matrimony between the
petitioner and the de facto complainant. The allegations
under Sec.498A of the IPC are false. He is a 74 year old
person and the initiation of the prosecution against him is
causing him great difficulties and hardship. The private
complaint filed by the de facto complainant was referred to the
police by the learned Magistrate under Sec.156(3) of the
Cr.P.C. and a crime has been registered. The petitioner
apprehends unnecessary and undeserved vexatious
proceedings against him. He has now come to this Court with
Crl.M.C. No. 2176 of 2008 -: 2 :-
a prayer under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. that the FIR may be
quashed invoking the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C.
2. There is no case before me that the allegations, if true,
would not constitute an offence under Sec.498A of the IPC. If
that be so, it is certainly for the police to conduct a proper
investigation and ascertain the truth or otherwise of the
allegations raised in the complaint. In proceedings under
Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. this Court cannot take upon its shoulder
the responsibility of resolving the disputed questions of fact. As
allegations, if true, would constitute an offence, I am of opinion
that the investigation by the police into the crime registered
need not be interfered with or prematurely terminated. I have
no reason to assume that the Investigator shall not conduct a
proper investigation and shall not ascertain the truth or
otherwise of the allegations. I am, in these circumstances,
satisfied that the FIR registered on the basis of the reference
under Sec.156(3) of the Cr.P.C. does not deserve to be quashed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
matter stands posted before the Family Court on 12/6/08 for
appearance of the parties for conciliation. The petitioner
apprehends vexatious arrest by the police. The petitioner has
not surrendered before the learned Magistrate and sought bail.
Crl.M.C. No. 2176 of 2008 -: 3 :-
He has not sought anticipatory bail also. In these circumstances,
I can only observe that if the petitioner surrenders before the
learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving sufficient
prior notice to the Prosecutor-in-charge of the case, the learned
Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in
accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender
itself.
4. With the above observations, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for
the petitioner.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge