Allowed

Abdul Latheef v. State of Kerala & Others

Kerala HC17 May 2010Crl.MC/940/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, the second accused in a case involving offences u/s 498A, 406, 306 IPC, sought quashing of Annexure-I final report. The de facto complainant filed an affidavit stating settlement by payment of Rs. 1,75,000 and no objection to quashing. Court quashed the final report related to the petitioner and disposed of the motion.

What did the court decide?

CP No. 61 of 2006 pending before JFCM Kayamkulam, so far as it relates to the petitioner, is hereby quashed.

Abdul Latheef Vs State of Kerala & Others — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 940 of 2010()

¶6

-----------------------SC.600/2006 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, ALAPPUZHA CP.61/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KAYAMKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S): 2ND ACCUSED

¶8

¶9

ABDUL LATHEEF, S/O.SHAMSUDHEEN,

¶10

AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT MADHEENA MANZIL, KRISHNAPURAM VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM)

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

MEHARISH, S/O.SHERAFUDHEEN, RESIDING AT THOTTATHIL KALAYILVEEDU, MANCHALLOOR MURI, PATHANAPURAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶16

VAHEEDA, W/O.SHERAFUDHEEN, RESIDING AT ARACKAL VEEDU, NEAR PALLURUTHI MARUNNUKADA JUNCTION, WARD XI, COCHIN CORPORATION, KADEBHAGAM MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶17

SHERAFUDHEEN, S/O.HASSAN, RESIDING AT ARACKAL VEEDU, NEAR PALLURUTHI MARUNNUKADA JUNTION, KADEBHAGAM MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶18

MIDHULESH, S/O.SHERAFUDHEEN, RESIDING AT ARACKAL VEEDU, NEAR PALLURUTHI MARUNNUKADA JUNTION,KADEBHAGAM MURI, RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶19

ADV. SRI.SAJU JOHN FOR R1

¶20

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶23

- - - - Crl.M.C. No. 940 of 2010 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 17^th May, 2010

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner who was the 2nd accused in Crime No. 582 of 2005 of Kayamkulam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 498 A, 406 and 306 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. seeks to quash Annexure - I final report in the above case. The case is pending as C.P. No. 61 of 2006 on the file of the J.F.C.M., Kayamkulam.

¶26

The marriage between the petitioner and Minisha was on 6-5-2004. After the marriage Minisha was residing in the petitioner's house along with the petitioner's mother Rukhiya Beevi and brother's wife Naseema . The petitioner was employed at Dubai. The case of the prosecution is that while Minisha was residing in her matrimonial home, on account of the cruelty meted out to her she committed suicide on 29-82005.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent/de facto complainant.

¶28

Crl.M.C. No. 940 of 2010 -:2:-

¶29

The case after committal was tried before the Addl. Sessions Court (Fast Track - II), Alappuzha as S.C. No. 600 of 2006. Pending investigation, the petitioner's mother Rukhiya Beevi died and the charge against her stood abated. Since the petitioner was employed abroad, he did not face trial. His sisterin-law Naseema alone faced the trial and she was acquitted as per judgment dated 31-8-2009.

¶30

Pending this M.C. Meharish who was the de facto complainant has settled the matter with the petitioner by paying a sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- in the name of the daughter of his deceased sister. The de facto complainant has filed an affidavit to the effect that himself, his mother, father and brother have no objection in quashing the final report in Crime No. 582 of 2005 of Kayamkulam Police Station against the petitioner. Accordingly, C.P. No. 61 of 2006 pending before the J.F.C.M. Kayamkulam, so far as it relates to the petitioner is hereby quashed.

¶31

Crl.M.C. No. 940 of 2010 shall stand disposed of as above.

¶32

Dated this the 17^th day of May 2010.

/true copy/

ani/

P.S. to Judge

Crl.M.C. No. 940 of 2010 -:3:-

¶37

ani.

Abdul Latheef v. State of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Latheef v. State of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alami @ Narayan Vs State of Kerala

Sivan Vs the Forest Range Officer

Vijayamohan Nair Vs State of Kerala

Low Heat Driers Pvt.Ltd Vs Biju George

Mr. Mammunhi @ Mohammedkunhi Vs K.Jayachandran. and Another

Ummer Vs State of Kerala