SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shaludeen vs Fathima M. on 18 March, 2019

Crl.M.C. No. 1532 / 2019
..1..

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1940

CRL.MC.NO. 1532 OF 2019

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1116/2018 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,HOSDRUG

CRIME NO. 762/2017 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION , KASARGOD

PETITIONERS:

1 SHALUDEEN, AGED 29 YEARS,
S/O.ABDULLA,RESIDING AT NADIRA QUARTERS,
KOLAVAYAL, AJANOOR.P.O,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

2 ABDULLA, AGED 54 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMMED, RESIDING AT NADIRA QUARTERS,
KOLAVAYAL, AJANOOR.P.O,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH

RESPONDENTS:

1 FATHIMA M., AGED 25 YEARS,
D/O.ABDUL SALAM, PARAPPALLI HOUSE,
PARAPPALLY, BELUR VILLAGE,
VELLARIKUNDU TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671543.

2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
PROSECUTIONS, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
(CRIME NO.762/2017 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT).

SRI.ASWIN T. SURESH FOR R1,
SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 18.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No. 1532 / 2019
..2..

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
———————————-
Crl.M.C. No. 1532 of 2019
———————————
Dated this the 18th day of March, 2019

ORDER

The petitioners herein are the accused in the impugned

Anx.A FIR in Crime No.762/2017 of Hosdurg Police Station,

Kasaragod district, registered for offences punishable under

Secs.498A of the IPC. It is stated that now the entire disputes

between the petitioners and the 1 st respondent defacto

complainant have been settled amicably and that the 1st

respondent has sworn to Anx.D affidavit before this Court,

wherein it is stated that she has settled the entire disputes

with the petitioners and that she has no objection for

quashment of the impugned criminal proceedings pending

against the petitioners. It is in the light of these aspects that

the petitioners have preferred the instant Crl.M.C. with the

prayer to quash the impugned criminal proceedings against

them.

2. In a catena of decisions, the Apex Court has held
Crl.M.C. No. 1532 / 2019
..3..

that, in appropriate cases involving even non-compoundable

offences, the High Court can quash prosecution by exercise of

the powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., if the parties have

really settled the whole dispute or if the continuance of the

prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, this Court finds

a real case of settlement between the parties and it is also

found that continuance of the prosecution in such a situation

will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious

time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the

court. On a perusal of the petition and on a close scrutiny of

the investigation materials on record and the affidavit of

settlement and taking into account the attendant facts and

circumstances of this case, this Court is of the considered

opinion that the legal principles laid down by the Apex Court

in the cases as in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported

in 2013 (1) SCC (Cri) 160 (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder

Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anr. reported

in (2014) 6 SCC 466, more particularly paragraph 29 thereof,

could be applied in this case to consider the prayer for

quashment.

3. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice
Crl.M.C. No. 1532 / 2019
..4..

that the impugned Anx.A FIR in Crime No.762/2017 of

Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod district and all further

proceedings arising therefrom pending against the accused

persons will stand quashed.

With these observations and directions, the Criminal

Miscellaneous Case stands finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS,
JUDGE

MMG
Crl.M.C. No. 1532 / 2019
..5..

APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRTME NO.762/2017 OF
HOSDURG POLICE STATION DATED 25.07.2017.
(4 PAGES)

ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE
1ST PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE
2ND PETITIONER.

ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT.

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh