RAGEESH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein had married the daughter of the fourth and fifth respondents and two children were born in the matrimonial relationship. It is stated that the petitioner herein was a drunkard and used to roam around without doing any job. Ultimately, he went to gulf countries in search of job. Later, he decided to return. It is alleged that, on a belief that he was returning without obtaining any job, wife of the petitioner herein jumped into a well after throwing both the children into the well. They were salvaged. However, wife and one daughter died. The second child survived. Crime was initially registered against the wife for offences punishable under sections 302 and 307 IPC and against the petitioner herein for offence under 306 IPC. Since the wife died later, petitioner herein is the sole surviving accused. According to the prosecution, petitioner herein had committed matrimonial cruelty and thereby committed the offence punishable under section 498A. He allegedly abetted the suicide of the wife and hence, committed the offence punishable under section 306 IPC.

(2.) Petitioner herein has approached this Court contending that, he is absolutely innocent of the crime and that, he has not abetted the suicide of the wife. He has also not committed any matrimonial cruelty driving her to commit suicide. According to the petitioner herein, she was depressed, which ultimately led to her death. It was stated that the child is now being looked after by him and his in-laws have no grievance against the petitioner herein. The dispute has been settled between the parties and hence, further prosecution of the petitioner herein can only result in a futile exercise. To substantiate the above contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the affidavits filed by the de facto complainants as well as the in-laws. Third respondent is the first informant. Learned counsel appearing for all the respondents submitted that the dispute has now been completely resolved and they are satisfied that the petitioner herein has not committed any offence. Hence, they have no objection in quashing the proceedings.

(3.) Since the allegation is serious, involving the death of the wife of the petitioner herein and he stands charged under section 498A r/w 306 IPC, this Court was not inclined to quash on compromise. Hence the learned counsel for the petitioner advanced his arguments on merits also.