Allowed

Najma K., v. Thareq Ali C.P.

Kerala HC8 Nov 2021Crl.MC/1981/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of further criminal proceedings against accused respondents. The court quashed the trials after accepting evidence of an out-of-court settlement and joint affidavits from the petitioner and respondents filed under Section 320 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

The entire further proceedings against the respondents in C.C. No. 1102/2019 were quashed.

Najma K., Vs Thareq Ali C.P. — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1981 OF 2021

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1102/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

¶7

OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE

¶8

PETITIONER (DEFACTO COMPLAINANT):

¶9

NAJMA K., AGED 33 YEARS D/O. ALI KOYA, EDATHIL HOUSE, THIRUVANGOOR POST, KOILANDY, KOZHIKODE 673 304.

¶10

BY ADVS. K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SMT.VANDANA MENON

¶11

RESPONDENTS (ACCUSED 1 TO 3 AND STATE):

¶12

1 THAREQ ALI C.P. AGED 41 YEARS S/O. MOOSAKOYA, SALSABIL HOUSE, VENGERY P.O. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 101, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER , MOOSAKOYA, AGED 70 YEARS, SALSABIL HOUSE, VENGERI P.O. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 010.

¶13

2 MOOSAKOYA, AGED 70 YEARS S/O. LATE ALIKOYA, SALSABIL HOUSE, VENGERY P.O. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 101,

¶14

3 SAFIYA, AGED 58 YEARS W/O. MOOSAKOYA, SALSABIL HOUSE, VENGERY P.O. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 101,

¶15

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

¶16

BY ADVS.SRI.VIMAL VIJAY

¶17

Crl.M.C. NO. 1981 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

PP SANGEETHARAJ N.R

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

Crl.M.C. NO. 1981 OF 2021

¶22

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This Crl.M.C has been filed seeking to quash the entire further proceedings against the respondents who are the accused in C.C. No. 1102/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandi.

¶25

The petitioner is the wife of the 1^st respondent, 2^nd respondent is the father of the 1^st respondent and 3^rd respondent is the wife of the 2^nd respondent. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, she preferred a complaint against the respondents alleging that after marriage, she has been subjected to physical torture and respondents 1 to 3 misappropriated 45 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs. 2,50,000/- which were given by her family as marriage gift and thereby accused alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Sections 406, 498A, 354 r/w 34 of IPC.

¶26

Adv. Vimal Vijay appeared on behalf of the defacto complainant and he reported about the settlement arrived at between the parties. Annexure A is the certified copy of the private complaint filed by the petitioner, Annexure B is the certified copy of the FIR in pursuance to the complaint filed by her, Annexure C is the final report, Annexure D is the affidavit sworn in by the petitioner and Annexures E is the affidavit sworn in by the 2^nd respondent on behalf

¶27

Crl.M.C. NO. 1981 OF 2021

¶28

¶29

of 1^st respondent. Power of attorney executed by the 1^st respondent in favour of 2^nd respondent also produced and enclosed with the file. Annexure F and G are the affidavits sworn in by 2^nd and 3^rd respondents.

¶30

All disputes between them have been mediated and settled and she do not want to continue the proceedings in C.C.No. 1102/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandi.

¶31

It has come out from the affidavit duly sworn in by the defacto complainant that the entire issues between the petitioner and respondents have been amicably settled out of court. Since the petitioner herself filed a complaint against the respondents and she approached this court seeking for quashing the proceedings along with a affidavit duly sworn in by her, the continuation of proceedings against the respondents will be an abuse of process of court. In the said circumstances, the entire further proceedings against the respondents 1 to 3, who are the accused in C.C. No. 1102/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandi is hereby quashed.

¶32

In the result, this Crl.M.C. stands allowed.

SD/-

M.R.ANITHA JUDGE

rps/

Crl.M.C. NO. 1981 OF 2021

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1981/2021

¶39

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

¶40

ANNEXURE A	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER U/S 190 OF THE CR. P.C. BEFORE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOYILANDY DT. 23.7.2019.
ANNEXURE B	TRUE COPY OF F.I.R. IN CRIME NO. 605/2019 ON THE FILES OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION DATED 13.08.2019.
ANNEXURE C	TRUE COPY OF FINAL REPROT DATED 10.11.2019 SUBMITTED BY S.I. POLICE, KOYILANDY POLICE STATION BEFORE JUDICIAL 1ST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KOYILANDY.
ANNEXURE D	AFFIDAVIT DT. 17.03.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER STATING THAT THE DISPUTE IN CRIME NO. 605/2019 OF KOYLANDI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE HAS BEEN SETTLED BETWEEN HE PARTIES.
ANNEXURE E	AFFIDAVIT DT. 19.03.2021 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER STATING THAT THE DISPUTE IN CRIME NO. 605/2019 OF KOYLANDI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE HAS BEEN SETTLED BETWEEN HE PARTIES.
ANNEXURE F	AFFIDAVIT DT. 19.03.2021 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT STATING THAT THE DISPUTE IN CRIME NO. 605/2019 OF KOYLANDI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE HAS BEEN SETTLED BETWEEN HE PARTIES.
ANNEXURE G	AFFIDAVIT DT. 19.03.2021 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT STATING THAT THE DISPUTE IN CRIME NO. 605/2019 OF KOYLANDI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE HAS BEEN SETTLED BETWEEN HE PARTIES.

Najma K., v. Thareq Ali C.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Najma K., v. Thareq Ali C.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreejith Unni, Vs State of Kerala

Shifana K.L. Vs State of Kerala

Shyamlal Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Ali M Vs State of Kerala

Moideen Safath, Vs the State of Kerala

Nabeel Vs the State of Kerala