IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 24TH JANUARY 2011 / 4TH MAGHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 109 of 2011() ------------------------ CRIME NO.1120/2010 OF PALA POLICESTATION .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS -------------------------- 1. JUSTIN, S/O.MATHEW, VALIYAPAIKKATTU HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE, ULLANADU P.O., KOTTAYAM. 2. MATHEW JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, VALIYAPAIKKATTU HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE, ULLANADU P.O.,KOTTAYAM. 3. GRACY MATHEW, W/O.MATHEW, VALIYAPAIKKATTU HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE, ULLANADU P.O.,KOTTAYAM. 4. JAYA MATHEW, D/O.MATHEW, VALIYAPAIKKATTU HOUSE, BHARANANGANAM VILLAGE, ULLANADU P.O.,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU SRI.CYRIAC KURIAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. MAREENA, D/O.GEORGE KUTTY, PAIKADA HOUSE KONIPPAD P.O., EDAMARUKU, MELUKAVU VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686001. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (CRIME NO.1120/2010), PIN 686 575. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PIN 682 031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R2 AND R3 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.109 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of January, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.1120 of 2010 of Pala Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Case is that petitioners subjected respondent No.1, the defacto complainant to cruelty demanding more ornaments and committed breach of trust. Case was registered on a complaint preferred by respondent No.1 and forwarded to the Police for investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to the petitioners, petitioner No.1 had filed Annexure-AI, O.P.(Div.) No.978 of 2010 for divorce in the Family Court, Ettumanoor and on getting notice of that petition respondent No.1 filed complaint alleging commission of offences as above stated. According to the learned counsel no offence is made out. 2. However, after arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel requested permission to withdraw this proceeding without prejudice to the right of petitioners to take up appropriate defence in the trial court at the appropriate stage. Crl.M.C.No.109/2011 2 Having heard learned counsel and the Public Prosecutor I am inclined to allow the request. Accordingly this petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to other rights if any of petitioner raise appropriate defence in the trial court at the appropriate stage. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks