SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Online)(KER) 27751

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SUNIL THOMAS, J
SINTO JOSE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
Sri.MANJU ANTONEY, Sri.THYPARAMBIL THOMAS THOMAS, Smt M K PUSHPALATHA

ORDER

This Crl.M.C is preferred by the sole accused in Crime No.643 of 2016 of Kadavanthra Police Station.

2. The contention of the prosecution is that the accused had enticed the de facto complainant who belonged to scheduled caste and had physical relationship with her, on a promise to marry her. They had undergone a form of a marriage on 19.01.2015 at a temple. Thereafter, they resided together in a rented house. Even though the de facto complainant had requested for registering the marriage on several occasions, accused tried to dodge the registration. The de facto complainant became pregnant and it was attempted to be aborted. Subsequently, the accused started evading her and on enquiry, it was revealed that he has another wife and a son aged 7 years. When this was questioned, she was harassed by the accused and ultimately he abandoned the de facto complainant, taking away Rs.20,000/- belonging to her. Hence, the complaint was laid. Crime was registered for offences punishable under sections 417, 420, 493 and 376 IPC and section 3(2)(v) of the Crl.M.C.8084/16 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989. The matter is now pending consideration.

3. Eve

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top