The Court quashed the complaint under Sections 498A and 506 IPC in a matrimonial dispute, allowing the petition on the grounds that the parties had amicably settled their differences, as evidenced by an affidavit from the defacto complainant and the case diary.
The complaint in C.C No.110/2016 filed against the petitioner was quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 19TH PHALGUNA, 1941
Crl.MC.No.4285 OF 2018
IN CC No.110/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED::
SHAMEEM P.M AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. MOHMOOD, HASEENA MANZIL, DESHABHIMANI ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM - 682017.
BY ADVS. SRI.SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL SRI.K.AMAR RAGH SRI.A.R.ASSIM SMT.N.S.HASNA MOL SHRI.MANISH NARAYANAN SRI.RAJEEV RAJADHANI
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.945/2011 OF ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION).
2 SHYMA HASHIM AGED 33 YEARS, D/O. HASHIM, SHYMA NIVAS, NEAR SHAHIDAR MOSQUE, KAYAMKULAM - 690502.
R2 BY ADV. ASWIN GOPAKUMAR R2 BY ADV. ANWIN GOPAKUMAR R2 BY ADV. KALA G.NAMBIAR R2 BY ADV. AMALNATH NAIK R2 BY ADV. ARJUN SANTHOSH R2 BY ADV. RENOY VINCENT R2 BY ADV. HEBA SARA ABRAHAM R2 BY ADV. NIRANJAN SUDHIR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No.4285/2018 2
ORDER
Dated this the 9th day of March 2020
This is an application seeking to quash Annexure-A1 complaint in C.C No.110/2016 on the files of JFMC-I, Kayamkulam. In C.C No.110/2016 the offences under Sections 498A, 506(ii) R/W Section 34 IPC have been allegedly committed by the petitioner herein against the defacto complainant.
Crl.MC.No.4285/2018 3
herein have been amicably settled and she has no grievance against him, as on date.
In the result, Crl.M.C is allowed. Annexure-A1 complaint, which is numbered as C.C No.110/2016, pending on the files of JFMC-I, Kayamkulam is quashed forthwith.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH
JUDGE
JJ
Crl.MC.No.4285/2018 4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.C.NO.110/2016 ON THE FILE OF JFMC-I, KAYAMKULAM.
ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.4.2017 IN OP (OTHERS) NO.1243/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, MAVELIKARA.
ANNEXURE A3 AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT.
//TRUE COPY//
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application seeking to quash a complaint under Sections 498A and 506 IPC should be allowed given the settlement of disputes between the parties?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
None mentioned in this orderReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shameem P.M
State of Kerala
Shyma Hashim
Mary Joseph
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
