SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Naushad vs State Of Kerala on 28 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 9TH PHALGUNA,
1941

Crl.MC.No.1732 OF 2020(F)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 717/2019 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,NADAPURAM

CRIME NO.143/2019 OF THOTTILPALAM POLICE STATION ,
Kozhikode

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

NAUSHAD, AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.ABDUL SALAM,ANGADIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
MARUTHONGARA AMSOM DESOM, VANNATHICHIRA POST,
VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI.K.N.ABHILASH
SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT
SRI.M.A.AHAMMAD SAHEER
SRI.P.B.MUHAMMED AJEESH

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682 031.

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
THOTTI PALAM POLICE STATION,
KOZHIKOD DISTRICT, PIN – 673 513.

3 RUBEENA, AGED 26 YEARS, W/O.NAUSHAD,
ANGADIPARAMBIL HOUSE,MARUTHONGARA AMSOM
DESOM, VANNATHICHIRA POST,VADAKARA TALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN – 673 513.

R3 BY ADV. JACOB SEBASTIAN
BY SR. PP SRI. SANTHOSH PETER

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.1732 OF 2020(F)

..2..

Crl.MC.No.1732 OF 2020(F)
————————————–

ORDER

This is a proceedings under Section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure for quashing Annexure – A1 Final Report

pending trial before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I,

Nadapuram, in C.C.No. 717 of 2019.

2. The petitioner is the sole accused in the said

case. The case was one registered under Section 498A of the

Indian Penal Code.

3. It is seen that the petitioner and the de facto

complainant of the crime have amicably settled the disputes.

An affidavit sworn to by the de facto complainant is part of

the records.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Public Prosecutor as also the learned counsel for

the de facto complainant.

5. It is seen that the dispute arose on account of

the matrimonial discord between the de facto complainant and

her husband, the petitioner. Though the matter is settled
Crl.MC.No.1732 OF 2020(F)

..3..

between the parties, I have examined the accusation in the

case and found that this is a matter that could be settled and

closed in the light of the decisions of the Apex Court in

Jitendra Raghuvanshi v. Babita Raghuvanshi, (2013) 4

SCC 58 and Gian singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC

303, invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

In the result, the Crl.M.C. is allowed and Annexure –

A1 Final Report pending trial before the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Nadapuram, in C.C.No. 717 of 2019 and all

further proceedings thereto are quashed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR
JUDGE
ds 29.02.2020
Crl.MC.No.1732 OF 2020(F)

..4..

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1: THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
DATED 12.04.2019 IN C.C. NO. 717 OF 2019
ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATECOURT-I, NADAPURAM, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT.

ANNEXURE A2: THE AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
20.02.2020.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation