Allowed

Abdu Rahiman v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jul 2018Crl.MC/3519/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Kerala High Court examined a petition to quash criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC. The court noted the petitioner was the main accused while co-accused were acquitted sparingly as their sole issue was a single sentence. Due to lack of victim testimony and medical records and the limited scope of co-accused acquittal, the court found no purpose in prosecuting the petiti

What did the court decide?

Criminal Misc. Case allowed; pending proceedings in L.P.No.263/2013 against the petitioner for punishment under Section 498A IPC stand quashed.

Abdu Rahiman Vs the State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3519 of 2018

¶6

PENDING AS LP 263/2013 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I, PONNANI

¶7

CRIME NO. 287/2006 OF CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/1ST ACCUSED.

¶9

ABDU RAHIMAN

¶10

AGED 49 YEARS, S/O HYDRU, CHEMBELE VALAPPIL HOUSE, SHUKSPURAM (P.O), PIN- MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ

¶12

SMT.T.S.SREEKUTTY

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT.:

¶14

1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN-682031.

¶15

2. SUBAIDA

¶16

AGED 46 YEARS, D/O ABDHU, MANALPARAMBIL HOUSE, AYILAKADU PO, PIN-679576, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶17

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.R.RENJITH

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Crl.MC.No. 3519 of 2018 ()

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶22

ANNEXURE 1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.287/2006 BEFORE THE CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION DATED 14.08.2006.

¶23

ANNEXURE 2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C 431/2006 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT PONNANI DATED 26.08.2006.

¶24

ANNEXURE 3 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT PONNANI DATED 30.11.2012.

¶25

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

R.AV

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

Crl.M.C.No.3519 of 2018

¶32

Dated this the 19^th day of July, 2018

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

The petitioner herein is the first accused in Crime No.287/2006 of Changaramkulam Police

¶35

Station for offence punishable under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶36

The defacto complainant alleged that the petitioner herein along with the other accused harassed the defacto complainant physically and mentally demanding dowry and money. She left the matrimonial house and laid a complaint. After investigation, final report was laid. Cognizance was taken. Accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4, faced the trial in CC.No.431/2006. The above accused were acquitted by Annexure-A3 judgment.

¶37

Contending that in the light of the acquittal of the co-accused, the substratum of the case has been broken and that the petitioner herein is entitled for the benefit of it, the petitioner herein has sought

¶38

Crl.M.C.No.3519 of 2018

¶39

¶40

to quash the proceedings. It is seen that by Annexure-3 judgment, the court below had acquitted accused Nos.2, 3 and 4, on a premise that there was only single sentence allegation against the accused. It was also noted that the main allegation was against the first accused. Hence it seems that the court below found that as against the accused, who had faced the trial, there was no satisfactory evidence.

¶41

It seems that the petitioner herein stands on a different footing. The main allegation is attributed to the petitioner herein. However, it is seen that even at the time of evidence, the second respondent only vaguely stated that she was beaten by the husband/first accused. Medical records have not been produced to substantiate it. She has not elaborated regarding the injuries, if any, and whether she had undergone any treatment. She has also not stated that the alleged assault amounted to cruelty

¶42

Crl.M.C.No.3519 of 2018

¶43

¶44

as contemplated under section 498A of the IPC. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that Annexure-A3 judgment, was not subject to any other appeal. Second respondent has not appeared before this court in spite of service notice to contest the claim of the petitioner herein. Having considered these, I am inclined to hold that no purpose will be served by prosecuting the petitioner herein.

¶45

It is seen that the crime is of the year 2006. The petitioner herein remained absent throughout the proceedings. The case is included in the L.P. Register as L.P.No.263/2013 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Ponnani. Definitely the petitioner herein, by his conduct, has contributed for the delay in the judicial proceedings. However, it is seen that by this court by order dated 6.6.2018 had permitted him to surrender before the court below and to seek bail. He was also directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five thousand

¶46

Crl.M.C.No.3519 of 2018

¶47

¶48

only) as a portion of the bond amount. It is reported that the petitioner herein has complied with that conditions. Having considered this, I am not inclined to impose any separate cost for causing delay.

¶49

Crl.M.C is accordingly allowed. All further proceedings in L.P.No.263/2013 before the Judicial First Class magistrate Court, Ponnani, arising from Crime No.287/2006 of Changaramkulam Police Station as against the petitioner herein stand quashed.

¶50

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶51

R.AV

¶52

//True Copy//

¶53

PA to Judge

Abdu Rahiman v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdu Rahiman v. the 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

Mahesh Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rasheed Vs State of Kerala

Anzil Vs the State of Kerala

Sajeev Vasudevan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Rahul Renjan Vs the State of Kerala

Sujesh.v Vs State of Kerala