Allowed

Shahana v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Sept 2015Crl.MC/6153/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the criminal prosecution under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against five respondents in a matrimonial dispute involving Section 498A and 420 IPC offences. The court held that since the parties reached an amicable out-of-court settlement resulting in divorce, continuing the prosecution was unnecessary as the dispute was resolved forever.

What did the court decide?

The prosecution against respondents 2 to 5 in C.C.No.1416/2013 was quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Miscellaneous Criminal Case was allowed.

Shahana 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

TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/24TH BHADRA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 6153 of 2015 ()

¶6

CC 1416/2013 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM ====================

¶7

PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:

¶8

SHAHANA SHANSUDEEN, AGED 23 YEARS D/O. SHAMSUDEEN, KOKATTUTHARAYIL PERINGALA P.O., KAYAMKULAM ALAPPUZHA -690502

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

¶10

SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE AND THE ACCUSED:

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KAYAMKULAM P.O. ALAPPUZHA – 690502

¶13

2. THOUFEEK, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. HUSSAIN

¶14

THURUTHIYIL KEERIKADU SOUTH

¶15

KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA – 690508

¶16

3. HUSSAIN, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL REHIMANKUTTY

¶17

THURUTHIYIL, KEERIKADU SOUTH, KAYAMKULAM

¶18

ALAPPUZHA – 690508

¶19

4. RAMLATH, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O. HUSSAIN THURUTHIYIL, KEERIKADU SOUTH, KAYAMKULAM ALAPPUZHA – 690508

¶20

5. THOUFIYA, D/O. HUSSAIN, THURUTHIYIL KEERIKADU SOUTH, KAYAMKULAM ALAPPUZHA – 690508, RESIDING AT KANIYANTE THARAYIL VEEDU, KADAPPA MURIYIL MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUR TALUK KOLLAM – 690519

¶21

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SHEEBA M.T.

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

Crl.MC.No. 6153 of 2015

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S RESPONDENTS

¶26

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE FIR NO.1461/2013 OF THE KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION ALONG WITH THE FINAL REPORT

¶27

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KAYAMKULAM DATED 30.07.2015

¶28

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶29

NIL

¶30

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

¶31

¶32

P. UBAID, J.

¶33

Crl.M.C.No.6153 of 2015

¶34

Dated this the 15^th day of September, 2015

¶35

The petitioner herein is the defacto complainant in C.C.No.1416/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kayamkulam involving the offences under Section 498A and 420 IPC. She seeks orders quashing the prosecution under Section 482 Cr.P.C., on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute out of court. Annexure A2 copy of the compromise filed before the learned Magistrate in M.C.No.86/2013 shows that the whole matrimonial dispute stands resolved forever, and that her husband has divorced her in terms of the settlement. The compromise also shows that all the proceedings including the present case stand settled amicably out of court. The Honourable Supreme Court has held in so many decisions that in such cases where the parties have come to terms amicably out of court, and continuance of prosecution will not serve any purpose, the High Court can quash the prosecution. Here, I find that the parties have come to terms, and the whole dispute stands resolved

¶36

¶37

Crl.M.C. No. 6153/2015

¶38

forever. It is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.

¶39

In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The prosecution against the respondents 2 to 5 in C.C.No.1416/2013 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kayamkulam will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

P. UBAID, JUDGE

¶42

Shahana v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahana 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

Muhammed Rafi Vs State of Kerala

V.K.Ummerkutty Vs State of Kerala

Gopalakrishnan Vs G. Aswathy

Liju Ommen Vs State of Kerala

A.R.Sunil Vs the State of Kerala

Devendran Vs State of Kerala