JES PAUL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) B .A. No.4931 of 2012 is filed by the first accused and B.A.No.5121 of 2012 is filed by the second accused (mother of the first accused) in Crime No.1443/2012 of Angamaly Police Station. Offences alleged against them are under sections 406, 420 and 376 r/w section 34 IPC. The de facto complainant was the classmate of the first accused and they were having intimate relationship. The first accused promised that he will marry her. After that, the first accused went abroad. He was working as a Scientist in United States of America. It seems that the parties fell apart. The first accused came to his native place. After the first accused reached the native place, he and her mother filed separate bail applications before this court. The complainant was represented by her counsel. Since both parties were represented by their counsel this court referred the matter to mediation, as it was stated that the first accused was actually in love with the complainant. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for both sides that earnest and sincere effort have been made by Adv. Smt. Chincy Gopakumar, the mediator, to settle the matter. It is reported that the matter has been settled amicably. Thereupon, the first accused married the complainant in accordance with the customary rites. Both of them appeared before this Court yesterday and submitted that their marriage had taken place and they are happily living together.

(2.) IN the light of the settlement arrived at the mediation, Crl.M.C. No.2607 of 2012 has been filed by the accused persons to quash the proceedings in Crime No.1443 of 2012 of Ankamaly Police Station. The de facto complainant, who is the second respondent herein, is represented by her counsel. Besides, she has also sworn to Annexure -A3 affidavit stating about the subsequent marriage and settlement of the entire dispute. The case of the de facto complainant in the F.I.S. was that the first accused by inducing her to believe that he will marry her, had sexual inter course with her several time. Against the second accused, the allegation of cheating was made. At the relevant time, the complainant was above 18 years. The alleged sexual act was done by the first accused promising to marry her. Now he has married her.

(3.) IN view of the above, petitioner in B.A. No.4931/2012 and petitioner in B.A. No.5121/2012 (accused Nos. 1 and 2) need not apprehend arrest. Hence, B.A. Nos. 4931 and 5121 of 2012 are closed. I here by place on record for the sincere service rendered by Adv. Smt. Chincy Gopakumar.