AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.47 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s Court-II, Cherthala, for the offence under Sections 497
IPC. The case before the court below is as a result of Annexure-V private complaint filed before the court below on 10.11.2014. The 2nd
respondent herein is the complainant. The petitioner is none other than the Uncle of the divorced wife of the 2nd respondent.
The wife of the 2nd respondent had filed O.P.No.1183 of 2013 before the Family Court, Alappuzha under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, seeking divorce and return of gold ornaments. O.P.No.1183 of 2013 was allowed in favour of the wife of the 2nd respondent, vide judgment
dated 01.09.2015. On going through the matter, it has come out that the 2nd respondent and his divorced wife were in loggerheads and a series of
litigations were there in between them. With the very same allegations as contained in Annexure-V private complaint, the 2nd respondent had
preferred Annexure-I petition before the Family Court, Alappuzha, seeking a divorce. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent did not turned up before the
said court and consequently, the said OP was dismissed through Annexure-III.
According to the 2nd respondent, on 15.09.2013, he could see the sexual act between the petitioner and the wife of the 2nd respondent.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited the attention of this Court to the decision in Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India and another
[AIR 1985 SC 1618], wherein, the following observations were made by the Apex Court in paragraph 13:
There was general agreement before us that since the petitioner''s husband has already obtained divorce against her on the ground of
desertion, no useful purpose will be served by inquiring into the allegation whether she had adulterous relationship with Dharma Ebenezer, against
whom the husband has lodged a complaint u/s 497 of the Penal Code. Accordingly, we quash that complainant and direct that no further
proceedings will be taken therein.
This is a case, wherein, the facts are almost the same in Sowmithri Vishnu''s Case (Supra). The wife of the 2nd respondent had obtained a
divorce, and that divorce has become final. Even after that the 2nd respondent wants to continue with the private complaint alleging offence under
Section 497 IPC. Following the guidelines given by the Apex Court, the complaint against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. There is no merit in
the matters contained in C.C.No.47 of 2016.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed and all further proceedings in C.C.No.47 of 2016 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate''s Court-II,
Cherthala, as against the petitioner, are quashed.