Allowed

Shibili v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jan 2016Crl.MC/196/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of an FIR under Sections 498A, 323, and 325 of the IPC. The court accepted the victim's affidavit stating a complete settlement and reconciliation, ruling that further prosecution was unnecessary as it would merely waste judicial time.

What did the court decide?

The F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No.583/2015 of Chadayamangalam Police Station were quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Shibili Vs State of Kerala — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/23RD POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 196 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 583/2015 OF CHADAYAMANAGALAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. SHIBILI, AGED 37 YEARS,

¶9

S/O.ABDUL RAFEEK, KIZHAKKEKKARA PUTHENVEEDU, PALLIMUKKU, KURIYODE P.O, CHADAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶10

2. ABUSHA BEEVI, AGED 68 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL RAFEEK, KIZHAKKEKKARA PUTHENVEEDU, PALLIMUKKU, KURIYODE PO, CHADAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶11

3. SABEENA, AGED 33 YEARS, W/O.SHIBU, KIZHAKKEKARA PUTHENNVEEDU, PALLIMUKKU, KURIYODE P.O, CHADAYAMANGLALAM VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶13

RESPONDENTS/STATE, COMPLAINANT & VICTIM:

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶15

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 690 001.

¶16

3. BEEGUM SHEENA,

¶17

D/O.SHAMSHAD BEEGUM, HAS VILLA, ODAYAM, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 041.

¶18

R3 BY SRI.R.ARUN

¶19

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JUSTIN JACOB

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

Crl.MC.No. 196 of 2016

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

¶24

ANNEXURE A1- THE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.583/2015 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION

¶25

ANNEUXRE A2- COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED

¶26

ANNEXURE A3- COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3D RESPONDENT

¶27

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

P.UBAID, J. --------------------------------------Crl.M.C No.196 of 2016 ---------------------------------------

¶33

Dated this the 13^th day of January, 2016

¶34

O R D E R

¶35

The petitioners seek orders quashing the F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No.583/2015 of the Chadayamangalam Police Station, registered under Sections 498A, 323 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code on the complaint of one Beegum Sheena. Orders are sought on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between the accused and the de facto complainant out of court. The de facto complainant Beegum Sheena is the third respondent in this proceeding brought under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. She has filed affidavit to the effect that she has settled the whole dispute with the accused and she has no grievance or complaint.

¶36

In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution; be it at the crime stage or at the trial stage or even at the appellate or revisional stage; if the parties have really settled the whole

¶37

Crl.M.C No.196 of 2016 2

¶38

dispute, or if continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose. Here, I find a real case of settlement between the parties, and I also find that continuance of prosecution in such a situation will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court, when the case ultimately comes before the court. The victim's affidavit shows that the whole matrimonial dispute stands resolved forever. It is submitted that the victim has joined her husband, and now they are leading a very happy married life. In such a situation, it is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.

¶39

In the result, this petition is allowed. The F.I.R and further proceedings in Crime No.583/2015 of the Chadayamangalam Police Station will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge

Shibili v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shibili 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

T.Noorjahan Vs Saithalavi

Shajeer Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Jabbar P.P. Vs Station House Officer

Sree Murukan Vs State of Kerala

Vineesh Babu Vs Anjana

Asha Vs State of Kerala