Allowed

Sayar P Asharaf v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Oct 2020Crl.MC/3711/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner-accuseds to quash criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC. The court found the matter amicably settled upon review of the third respondent's affidavit and held that continuing proceedings would amount to an abuse of process. Based on Supreme Court precedents, the High Court ordered the quashing of the complaint.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in C.C.No.1706 of 2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha, are quashed.

Sayar P Asharaf Vs State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 17TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.3711 OF 2020(D)

¶6

CC 1706/2017 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I MUVATUPUZHA

¶7

CRIME NO.3177/2017 OF Muvattupuzha Police Station , Ernakulam

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

1 SAYAR P ASHARAF AGED 33 YEARS S/O ASHARAF, THRIKKAYIL PUTHETH HOUSE, EAST VAZHAPPILLY, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN686 669

¶10

2 ASHARAF, AGED 55 YEARS S/O MUHAMMED, THRIKKAYIL PUTHETH HOUSE, EAST VAZHAPPILLY, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN686 669

¶11

3 NAJATH, AGED 52 YEARS W/O ASHARAF, THRIKKAYIL PUTHETH HOUSE, EAST VAZHAPPILLY, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN686 669

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.S.RENJITH SRI.S.UNNIKRISHNAN (NELLAD)

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.

¶15

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶16

Crl.M.C No.3711 of 2020

¶17

-2-

¶18

DISTRICT, PIN-686 661.

¶19

3 JUWAIRIYA AGED 30 YEARS D/O KADHER PILLA, IRAYATHAN HOUSE, KANJIRAKKAD KARA, KANJIRAKKAD P.O.PERUMBAVOOR VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR, PIN-683 543.

¶20

R3 BY ADV. JACOB E SIMON

¶21

OTHER PRESENT:

¶22

SR.PP.C.S.HRITHWIK

¶23

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

Crl.M.C No.3711 of 2020

¶25

-3-

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Dated this the 09^th day of October, 2020

¶28

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.3177 of 2017 registered at the Moovattupuzha Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 498 A r/w 34 of IPC, now pending as C.C.No.1706 of 2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha. The third respondent is the first petitioner's wife. Petitioners 2 and 3 are the father and mother of the first petitioner. While the husband and the wife were living together in the matrimonial home, disputes arose between them, leading to registration of the crime at the instance of the third respondent. Annexure A4 affidavit has been filed by the third respondent stating that the dispute which led to registration of the crime,

¶29

Crl.M.C No.3711 of 2020

¶30

-4-

¶31

has been settled amicably and she has no subsisting grievance in the matter.

¶32

2. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also,

¶33

who, on instructions, submits that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents and the parties are now living together happily.

¶34

3. Having considered the gravity of the offences alleged, nature of the injury caused and having perused the affidavit filed by third respondent, the contents of which are submitted to be true and voluntary, I am satisfied that the matter has been amicably settled and that no public interest is involved in this matter. Moreover, in view of the settlement, possibility of the criminal proceedings ending in conviction

¶35

is remote. As such, continuance of the proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of court and hence, in view of the legal position

¶36

Crl.M.C No.3711 of 2020

¶37

-5-

¶38

set out by the Honourable Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], there is no impediment in granting the relief.

¶39

In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.1706 of 2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Muvattupuzha, is quashed.

¶40

Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶41

Scl/09.10.2020

¶42

Crl.M.C No.3711 of 2020

¶43

-6-

¶44

APPENDIX

¶45

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶46

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR ALONG WITH THE CERTIFIED COPY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO 3177 OF 2020 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION

¶47

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 32177 OF 2020 OF MUVATTUPUZHA POLICE STATION

¶48

ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.5.2019 IN OP NO 501 OF 2018 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA

¶49

ANNEXURE A4 ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 30.7.2020

Sayar P Asharaf v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayar P Asharaf 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambhu, Vs State of Kerala

Franklin Vs State of Kerala

Fasaludheen Vs State of Kerala

Sajan Thomas Vs the State of Kerala

Sandeep Sebastian Vs State of Kerala

Lakshmi P.R Vs State of Kerala