Allowed

Sali Muhammed v. Haseena K.

Kerala HC18 Jan 2016Crl.MC/50/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three accused petitioned to quash criminal proceedings for Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC based on an amicable settlement. The High Court, finding the settlement genuine and devoid of public interest, allowed the petition and quashed the prosecution under Section 482 CrPC, discharging bail bonds.

What did the court decide?

CrPC proceedings under CC No. 1282/2015 quashed; petitioners released from prosecution; bail bonds discharged.

Sali Muhammed Vs Haseena K. — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/28TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

CRL.MC.NO. 50 OF 2016 ()

¶6

CC 1282/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE'S COURT-I,HOSDRUG

¶7

CRIME NO. 163/2015 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION , KASARGOD

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶9

1. SALI MUHAMMED

¶10

S/O.LATE MUHAMMEDKUNHI, SAMEERA MANZIL, VELLIKOTH

¶11

KARAKUZHI, AJANOOR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DSTRICT.

¶12

2. NABEESA B.

¶13

W/O.LATE MUHAMMEDKUNHI, VELLIKOTH, KARAKUZHI AJANOOR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DSTRICT.

¶14

3. SAMEERA V. W/O.MUHAMMED ALI, VELLIKOTH, KARAKUZHI

¶15

AJANOOR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DSTRICT.

¶16

BY ADVS.SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) SRI.ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶18

1. HASEENA K.

¶19

D/O.P.M.ABOOBACKER, FAJAR VILLA, THOYAMMAL BALLA VILLAGE, HOSDURG, KASARAGOD-671 531.

¶20

2. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶21

R1 BY ADV. SRI.C.H.ABDUL RASAC R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SHEEBA M.T.

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-012016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

CRL.MC.NO. 50 OF 2016 ()

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶26

ANNEXURE-1. TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.163/2015 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION.

¶27

ANNEXURE-2. TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 21/11/2015.

¶28

ANNEXURE-3. TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶29

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶30

--------------------------------------

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

SKV

P.UBAID, J. ===========

¶35

Crl.M.C No.50 of 2016

¶36

===============

¶37

Dated this the 18^th day of January, 2015

¶38

ORDER

¶39

The petitioners herein are the three accused in C.C.No. 1282/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Hosdurg. They seek orders quashing the prosecution on the ground of amicable settlement of the whole dispute between them and the de facto complainant. Crime in this case was registered under Sections 498(A) and 406 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on the complaint of one Haseena K. who is the 1^st 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 now.

¶40

In so many decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court

¶41

Crl.M.C No.50 of 2016 -2-

¶42

has held that even in cases involving non-compoundable offences, the High Court can quash the prosecution in pending proceedings, if the parties have really settled the whole dispute amicably out of court, and continuance of further proceedings will not serve any purpose in such a circumstance of amicable settlement. Here, I find a real and genuine case of settlement between the parties. This is not a case involving any public interest or public issue. The parties have come to terms amicably on the intervention of persons acceptable to both sides. In such a situation, continuance of the prosecution will not serve any purpose other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will support the prosecution in such a situation, if the case goes to trial.

¶43

The victim's affidavit shows that the whole matrimonial dispute stands resolved forever, the marriage itself stands dissolved by pronouncement of talaq, and the victim has received all her dues under the law as a divorced woman. In such a situation, it is appropriate that the prosecution be quashed.

¶44

Crl.M.C No.50 of 2016 -3-

¶45

In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners herein in C.C. No.1282/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Hosdurg will stand quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged.

¶46

P.UBAID, JUDGE

¶47

SKV

Sali Muhammed v. Haseena K.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sali Muhammed v. Haseena K.

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

Vijayan Vs Pramod

Salah Said Al Ghailini Vs Sufeena M.P

Ashokan Vs State of Kerala

Saifudeen Vs State of Kerala

Abdulsalam Vs State of Kerala

Narayanan Namboodiri V.P. Vs State of Kerala