SHOBA KUTTAN B.L. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the above Crl.Miscellaneous case filed under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is as follows :

(2.) Heard Sri.Arun Chandy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent-State of Kerala.

(3.) According to the petitioner, her marriage with the 2nd respondent was held on 12.05.1998 and later the 2 nd respondent has filed petition before the police that the petitioner herein has been missing and accordingly "person missing case" has been registered by the Additional Sub Inspector of Police, Kovalam, Thiruvananthapuram as per Annexure-A1 First Information Report (FIR) in Crime No.1642/2020 under Sec.57(1)(A) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 regarding the alleged missing of the petitioner. Further that, the allegation in Annexure-A1 FIR is that the petitioner is the wife of the 2 nd respondent and that the 2nd respondent has complained that the petitioner was found missing since 16.08.2020. According to the petitioner, her marriage with the 2nd respondent was totally irretrievably broken down and that the petitioner has been assaulted by the 2nd respondent and that she has been subjected to mental and physical cruelty, etc. and that it is only on this account to escape from the clutches of the 2 nd respondent, that she has left her husband's home and that she has apprehension that if she discloses her present address and residence, the 2 nd respondent may cause more harm to her, etc. Further that, the petitioner has decided that it is not at all safe for her to continue to live with the 2nd respondent, as it will be extremely harmful to her and she might even be injured in the said process and that she is not interested to continue the relationship with the 2 nd respondent and that the petitioner is taking steps to approach the Family Court concerned seeking divorce, that the petitioner had thus voluntarily left her husband's home on 16.08.2020. Accordingly, the petitioner seeks for directions to ensure that Annexure-A1 FIR may be quashed by this Court, as it is based upon misconceived factual foundation, as the petitioner is not actually missing, but has voluntarily left her husband's home, as otherwise it would have been dangerous to her physical safety, etc. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the following directions and orders are passed: