IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2056 of 2009() ------------------------- CC.79/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VARKALA .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ONE TO FOUR ---------------------------------- 1. SURESH S/O. DHARMARAJAN, PALVILLAH, NEAR CHANDAMUKKU, CONNINMOODU, ELAKAMON DESOM, AYROOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK. 2. DHARMARAJAN, S/O. DHARMARAJAN, PALVILLAH, NEAR CHANDAMUKKU, CONNINMOODU, ELAKAMON DESOM, AYROOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK. 3. SARASWATHY W/O. DHARMARAJAN, PALVILLAH, NEAR CHANDAMUKKU, CONNINMOODU, ELAKAMON DESOM, AYROOR VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK. 4. SHEEJA D/O.DHARMARAJAN, PALVILLAH, NEAR CHANDAMUKKU, CONNINMOODU, ELAKAMON DESOM, AYROOR VILLLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.R.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): 1ST RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SUNITHA, D/O.LEELA, 40 YEARS, S.N.MANDIRAM, PUTHUVAL CONNINMOODU, ELAKAMON DESON, AYROOR VILLAGE, VARKALA. R1 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.2056 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 8th October 2009 O R D E R Petitioners are the accused and second respondent the complainant in C.C.79/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Varkala taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A complaint, as well as the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate contending that it is only an abuse of process of the court. Case of the petitioners is that the alleged harassment of second respondent was 17 years earlier and before the Family court second respondent only claimed gold ornaments and custody of the child and while taking cognizance, learned Magistrate has not considered all these relevant facts, and in such circumstances, the case is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and second respondent were heard. 3. Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance CRMC 2056/09 2 after conducting an inquiry under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure, on Annexure-A complaint, for the offence under Section 498 A read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and issued summons to the petitioners. Petitioners are entitled to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate and seek an order of discharge under Section 245 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that petitioners would be compelled to appear before the learned Magistrate and hence personal appearance of petitioners may be dispensed with. If an application is filed to dispense with the personal presence of the petitioners, learned Magistrate to grant exemption for the purpose of filing a petition for discharge and its hearing under Section 245 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are permitted to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Magistrate. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.