This judgment dismisses a criminal miscellaneous petition filed to quash proceedings under Section 498-A IPC. The petition, initially supported by the de facto complainant's affidavit of settlement, was dismissed because she subsequently withdrew her consent via a second affidavit before the court.
The Criminal M.C. No. 2179 of 2014 is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/22ND JYAISHTA, 1936
Crl.MC.No. 2179 of 2014 ()
CC. NO.541/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KODUNGALLUR. CRIME NO. 1271/2010 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION.
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:
1. ABDULLA, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.HAMEED, PADINJARE VEETTIL, KAIPAMANGALAM, KODUNGALLUR, NOW WORKING AS ASSISTANT COMMANDANT 78 BATTALION, KOHIMA, NAGALAND.
2. HAMEED, AGED 82 YEARS, S/O.SAYED, PADINJARE VEETTIL, KAIPAMANGALAM, KODUNGALLUR.
3. NABEESA, AGED 70 YEARS, W/O.HAMEED, PADINJARE VEETTIL, KAIPAMANGALAM, KODUNGALLUR.
BY ADV. SRI.SANJAY THAMPI.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, MATHILAKAM, PIN-680 685.
3. SULFIA, AGED 34 YEARS, D/O.ABDUL JABBAR, PARILAKATHOOTTU HOUSE, NEAR ALUVA BYE PASS, ALUVA, PIN-683 101.
R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN. R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.M.RAMAN KARTHA.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
Crl.MC.No. 2179 of 2014
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-
ANNX.I - TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1271/2010 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION.
ANNX.II - TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 07-04-2014 FILED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:-
ANNEX. R3A COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 24/04/2014 WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 25/04/2014.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
rs.
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.
Cr.M.C. No. 2179 of 2014
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2014
ORDER
Petitioners are accused in CC No. 541/2011 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kodungalloor. The third respondent is the de facto-complainant. The first petitioner is her husband.
cr.M.C No.2179 /2014
2
respondent. For the reasons stated in the affidavit, she has withdrawn the consent recorded in her first affidavit. In these circumstances, the only course open to the court is to dismiss the Criminal M.C.
In the result, this Criminal M.C. is dismissed.
Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE
JV
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashment of proceedings under Section 498-A IPC is maintainable when the de facto complainant withdraws her consent after initially giving it.
What is the legal consequence of the withdrawal of consent by the wife when the petitioners previously relied on her affidavit for settlement.
Whether the High Court is justified in dismissing the petition for quashing the proceedings upon revelation of changed statement by the complainant.
Abdulla
Hameed
Nabeesa
State of Kerala
Sub Inspector of Police, Mathilakam
Sulfia
K. Abraham Mathew
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
