SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shefin Shamsudeenm vs Selma Nizamudeen on 24 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1941

Crl.MC.No.1549 OF 2020(C)

CRIME NO.79/2018 OF Pandalam Police Station, Pathanamthitta

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

SHEFIN SHAMSUDEENM,
AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.NIZAMUDEEN,
SHAMNAS MANSIL, THONNALLOOR, PANDALAM VILLAGE,
PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA, INDIA.

BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ

RESPONDENTS/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT STATE :

1 SELMA NIZAMUDEEN,
VILAYIL PUTHAN VEEDU, TKMC P.O., KARIKKODE,
KOTTANKARA VILLAGE, KOLLOM, PANDALAM,
PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA.

2 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PANDALAM POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

R1 BY ADV. GAJENDRA SINGH RAJPUROHIT
R1 BY ADV. SMT.LIYA ELZA ALEX
R2 BY SRI.AMJAD ALI, SR.PP

OTHER PRESENT:

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.1549 OF 2020(C)
2

ORDER

This is a proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure for quashing Annexure-A1 First Information

Report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto in Crime No.79

of 2018 of Pandalam Police Station.

2. The petitioner is the accused in the said case. The

case was one registered under Sections 498A and 323 of the Indian

Penal Code.

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

complainant have amicably settled the disputes. An affidavit sworn

to by the de facto complainant to that effect is part of the records.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the

learned Public Prosecutor as also the learned counsel for 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 accused. Though the matter is settled 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
Crl.MC.No.1549 OF 2020(C)
3

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

First Information Report and all further proceedings pursuant

thereto in Crime No.79 of 2018 of Pandalam Police Station are

quashed.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR
rkj JUDGE
Crl.MC.No.1549 OF 2020(C)
4

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME

NO.79/2018 OF PANDALAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE A SETTLEMENT IN OP 48
OF 2019 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT KOLLOM.

ANNEXURE A3 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT/3RD RESPONDENT.

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