Allowed

Unus A.H v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Sept 2015Crl.MC/2999/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala quashed two criminal prosecutions and an appellate proceeding arising from a matrimonial dispute. Following an amicable settlement where the victim had grievances redressed and financial compensation was agreed upon, the Court set aside convictions, released the appellants from prosecution, and permitted the withdrawal of a deposited sum.

What did the court decide?

Prosecutions quashed; conviction and sentence set aside; appellants released; deposited amount withdrawn; FIR in connected case quashed.

Unus A.H Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/18TH BHADRA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 2999 of 2015 ()

¶6

CC 2683/2010 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOLLAM CRIME NO. 65/2010 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION , KOLLAM DISTRICT =================

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 5:

¶8

1. UNUS A.H., AGED 48 YEARS

¶9

POKALAKKARAN HOUSE, THARA NAGAR, 2ND STREET CHANDRA NAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 007.

¶10

2. AMEENA, AGED 70 YEARS

¶11

W/O.HAMSA, POKALAKKARAN HOUSE, THARA NAGAR

¶12

2ND STREET, CHANDRA NAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD -678 007.

¶13

3. USMAN, AGED 36 YEARS

¶14

POKALAKKARAN HOUSE, THARA NAGAR, 2ND STREET

¶15

CHANDRA NAGAR P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 007.

¶16

4. AZIYA, AGED 30 YEARS

¶17

D/O.AMEENA, ERLAPURI HOUSE, ERLAPURI DESOM

¶18

WARD NO.XI, ELAPUNDI VILLAGE, PALAKKAD.

¶19

5. FAZEELA, AGED 43 YEARS POKALAKKARAN HOUSE, CHANDRA NAGAR, THARA NAGAR

¶20

IIND STREET, MARUTHA ROAD VILLAGE, PALAKKADDISTRICT.

¶21

BY ADVS.SRI.ALAN PAPALI

¶22

SRI.J.VIMAL

¶23

SRI.ANTONY ROBERT DIAS

¶24

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶25

1. STATE OF KERALA (DY.S.P. DCRB KOLLAM CRIME NO.65/2010 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE POLICE STATION) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 31.

¶26

2. ASEEDA SHIHABUDHEEN, HILL VIEW, 193, BHARATH NAGAR, ERAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM.

¶27

R2 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJENDRAN NAIR R2 BY ADV. SMT.M.SANTHY R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. REMA R.

¶28

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-09-2015 ALONG WITH Crl.M.C.No.5662/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

Crl.MC.No. 2999 of 2015 ()

¶30

APPENDIX

¶31

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶32

ANNEXURE-I: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN CC NO.2683/2010 OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE - II, KOLLAM DATED 29.10.2012 ANNEXURE-II: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN CRL.APPEAL NO.304/2012 OF THE SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM DATED 9.11.2012 ANNEXURE-III: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPROMISE ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE FIRST PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN LOK ADALAT CASE NO.1732/2014 OF THE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, KOLLAM DATED 19.12.2014

¶33

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶34

NIL

¶35

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

¶36

¶37

P. UBAID, J.

¶38

Crl.M.C.Nos.2999 & 5662 of 2015

¶39

Dated this the 9^th day of September, 2015

¶40

Two prosecutions that arose out of a matrimonial dispute

¶41

are sought to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. One is now at the stage of appeal against conviction, and the other has reached nowhere. C.C.2683/2010 wherein the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam made a conviction under Section 498A and other sections, is now pending in appeal before the Court of Session, Kollam as Crl.Appeal No.304/2012. The appellants therein (accused) are the petitioners in Crl.MC.No.2999/2015. The defacto complainant is the 2^nd respondent in the said proceeding. The parties now seek orders on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute out of court. A prosecution brought by the brother of the victim in C.C.No.2683/2010 is the other case which is sought to be quashed. It was registered as Crime No.1440/2011 at the Eravipuram Police Station, Kollam District. The 2^nd respondent in Crl.M.C.No.2999/2015 has filed affidavit to the effect that the

¶42

¶43

Crl.M.C.Nos.2999 & 5662 of 2015

¶44

whole matrimonial dispute stands resolved forever, including the connected dispute involved in Crime No.1440/2011. As part of the settlement outside, the 1^st petitioner herein has made deposit of Rs.20,25,000/- in the Family Court, Kollam in O.P.No.85/2010. The 2^nd respondent seeks orders permitting her to withdraw the amount without any objection. The 1^st petitioner has filed an affidavit to the effect that he has no objection in releasing the said amount to the 2^nd respondent (his wife), in Crl.M.C.No.2999/2015. Her brother who is the defacto complainant in Crime No.1440/2011 has also filed affidavit that he does not want to proceed with he matter, that he has no grievance or complaint now in view of the resolution of the whole matrimonial dispute involving his sister, and that he would not object to the police report referring the crime No.25/2013 of the Eravipuram Police Station. In the present circumstance of amicable settlement involving resolution of the whole dispute forever, the said affidavit and also the affidavit of the victim in the convicted matter are accepted. The Honourable Supreme Court has held in so many decisions that even in cases involving

¶45

¶46

Crl.M.C.Nos.2999 & 5662 of 2015

¶47

non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution; whatever be the stage of it, if the parties have come to terms amicably out of court, and continuance of the prosecution will either cause harm and hardship to the parties, or will cause only waste of the precious time of the court. Here, I find that there is a genuine settlement between the parties, and all the grievance of the victim of offence in the main case stands legally and effectively redressed. She does not want to continue the prosecution now. In such a situation, it is appropriate that both the prosecutions be quashed.

¶48

In the result, both the petitions are allowed. Accordingly, the prosecution against the petitioners in Crl.M.C.2999/2015, now pending in appeal as Crl.Appeal No.304/2012 in the Court of Session, Kollam, including the whole appeal proceedings will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court will stand set aside. The petitioners (appellants) will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged. So also, the FIR and all further proceedings in

¶49

¶50

Crl.M.C.Nos.2999 & 5662 of 2015

¶51

Crime No.1440/2011 of the Eravipuram Police Station, whatever be the stage of it, will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The 2^nd respondent in Crl.M.C. No.2999/2015 is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.20,25,000/- deposited in the Family Court, Kollam in O.P.No.85/2010 unconditionally. The police report in crime No.25/2013 of Eravipuram Police Station will stand confirmed.

¶52

Furnish a copy of this order to the counsel on both sides without delay.

¶53

Sd/-

¶54

P. UBAID, JUDGE

¶55

Unus A.H v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Unus A.H v. State of Kerala

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

Thahira Vs State of Kerala

Rahmath Shafi Vs State of Kerala

Jasif M. Vs Muhammed Razal

Reji Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Dr. Shobha Sara Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Shri.O.Vidyasagar Vs Smt.J.K.Lalitha