Disposed

Shamsudheen v. Victim

Kerala HC6 Nov 2020Crl.MC/5104/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous case filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR, the High Court observed that the case was still pending investigation. The Court directed the investigating officer to complete the investigation without delay, including recording statements of the second respondent under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., and to file the final report within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directing investigation to be completed within four months with recording of statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; Relief against arrest not granted.

Shamsudheen Vs Victim — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.M.C. No.5104 of 2018

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 15TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶7

Crl.MC.No.5104 OF 2018

¶8

CRIME NO.379/2018 OF Thamarassery Police Station , Kozhikode

¶9

PETITIONER/S:

¶10

SHAMSUDHEEN

¶11

S/O. MUHAMMED, MADAPPALLIYIL, CHAMAL, THAMARASSERRY, KOZHIKODE.

¶12

BY ADVS.

¶13

SHRI.C.C.ABRAHAM SRI.ALEX ABRAHAM

¶14

RESPONDENT/S:

¶15

VICTIM

¶16

R1 BY ADV. V.J. JAMES

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.M.C. No.5104 of 2018

¶21

¶22

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.M.C. No.5104 of 2018

¶25

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

¶26

Dated this the 6^th day of November, 2020

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

The prayer in the aforecaptioned Criminal Miscellaneous case filed under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. is as follows :

¶29

“.....to calll for the records relating to crime No.379/2018 of Thamarassery Police Station pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thamarassery and quash Annexure-A2 FIR.”

¶30

Heard Sri.C.C.Abraham, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner (sole accused), Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2^nd respondent-State of Kerala and Sri.V.J.James, learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent (lady victim)

¶31

The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in Annexure-A2 first information statement in Crime No.379/2019 of Thamarassery Police Station, Kozhikode District which has been registered on 18.7.2018 at about 5.10 p.m. on the basis of Annexure-A1 first information statement given by the 1^st respondent - lady victim on the same day, in respect of the alleged incident which has happened on 11.7.2018.

¶32

The petitioner herein is the elder brother of the husband of the 1^st respondent-lady victim. One of the main contention urged by the

¶33

Crl.M.C. No.5104 of 2018

¶34

¶35

petitioner is that the 2^nd respondent victim herself has given Annexure-A3 petition dated 26.7.2018 before the investigating officer concerned stating that the allegations have been made by her out of misunderstandings and that the incidents have not taken place. That on the day in question when her husband had returned back, he had found that another person was in the house along with the petitioner and that the 2^nd respondent’s husband raised certain false allegations against her and it is out of this enmity that she has made allegations in Annexure-A1 FIS against the petitioner, who is her husband’s elder brother out of such disputes etc.

¶36

After hearing both sides, it is seen that the case is still pending investigation at the crime stage and therefore, there is no necessity for this Court to examine these issues at this stage when the crime is pending investigation. Accordingly, it is ordered that the investigating officer concerned will take all reasonable endeavours possible in this circumstances to ensure that the investigation in respect of Annexure-A2 Crime No.379/2018 of Thamarassery Police Station is completed without much delay and in the said process, the additional statement of the 2^nd respondent-lady victim under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C statement may also be taken without much delay and immediately thereafter, the additional statement of the 2^nd respondent-lady victim under Sec.164 Cr.P.C. may also be recorded before the learned Magistrate without much delay. These aspects may be duly completed by the investigating officer within 3 weeks from the

¶37

Crl.M.C. No.5104 of 2018

¶38

¶39

date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the investigating officer will ensure that the investigation in this case is completed and finalized without much delay, so that the final report could be filed before the Jurisdictional Court concerned as early as possible, at any rate, within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After the submission of the final report, in case the petitioner has any legally justiciable grievances, it is for him to work out his remedies, in the manner known to law.

¶40

The petitioner submits that he has not secured bail till now as this petition was pending and that therefore, this Court may order that until the conclusion of the investigation process, he may not be arrested by the investigating officer. It is made clear that in case the petitioner has not moved for bail, then he may do so by filing appropriate application for grant of anticipatory bail, before the competent court, without any further delay.

¶41

With these observations and directions, the above Criminal Miscellaneous case will stand finally disposed of.

¶42

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE

¶43

SKS

¶44

Crl.M.C. No.5104 of 2018

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT RECORDED BY THE POLICE OFFICER CPO 7655 MS. SUJATHA K

¶48

ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRT NO 379/2018 OF THAMARASSERRY POLICE STAION FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT THAMARASSERRY

¶49

ANNEXURE-A3 PETITION DATED 26.7.2018 SUBMITTED BY MRS. NABEESA TO THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE REQUESTING TO WITHDRAW HER COMPLAINT.

¶50

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

Shamsudheen v. Victim

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamsudheen v. Victim

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

Majeed Vs Fousiya

Sheteer Khan K.S Vs State of Kerala

Santhi Vs Seema Vinod

Dr.Biju P.V Vs State of Kerala

Mariamma K. George Vs State of Kerala

O.v.Sreedath Vs State of Kerala