Allowed

Sufaid v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2024Crl.MC/159/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the FIR and criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC. After hearing counsel and reviewing an affidavit of settlement by the complainant, the Court held the offence was not serious, no public interest was involved, and the prospect of conviction was remote, making quashing the appropriate remedy to save judicial time and promote harmony.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the First Information Report, Final Report, and all further proceedings in Crime No.911/2022 and C.C. No.35/2023.

Sufaid Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1945

¶4

CRL.MC NO. 159 OF 2024

¶5

CRIME NO.911/2022 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.35 OF 2023 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,HOSDRUG

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶7

1 SUFAID

¶8

AGED 32 YEARS

¶9

S/O USMAN TA ,FATHIMA MANZIL THURUTHI KASABA
VILLAGE KASARGOD ,KERALA, PIN - 671351

¶10

2 USMAN TA AGED 62 YEARS

¶11

S/O ABDUL KADHAR HAJI FATHIMA MANZIL THURUTHI
KASABA VILLAGE KASARGOD ,KERALA, PIN - 671351

¶12

3 SUBAIDA P V AGED 54 YEARS

¶13

W/O USMAN TA ,FATHIMA MANZIL THURUTHI KASABA
VILLAGE KASARGOD ,KERALA, PIN - 671351

¶14

4 FATHIMA T A AGED 20 YEARS

¶15

D/O USMAN TA ,FATHIMA MANZIL THURUTHI KASABA
VILLAGE KASARGOD ,KERALA, PIN - 671351

¶16

BY ADV

¶17

R.ANAS MUHAMMED SHAMNAD

¶18

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶19

1 STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682031

¶20

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHANDERA POLICE STATION ,KASARGOD DISRTICT, PIN - 671310

¶21

¶22

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶23

3FATHIMA ISMAIL
AG HOUSE MATTAMEL ,SOUTH THRIKKARIPPUR KASARGOD
DISTRICT, PIN - 671310
BY ADVS.
SRI. C. S. HRITHWIK- SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THAREEK T.S.
MOHANAN PILLAI M.B.(K/2002/2023)

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶25

¶26

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶27

C. S. DIAS, J.

¶28

-------------------------------------------------------Crl. M.C. No. 159 OF 2024

¶29

------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 11^th day of March, 2024

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash Annexure A1 First Information Report (FIR) & Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.911/2022 of Chandera Police Station, Kasargod and all further proceedings in C.C. No.35/2023 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg, Kasargod.

¶32

The petitioners are the accused Nos. 1 to 4 in the above crime, registered against them at the instance of the third respondent, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code,1860.

¶33

¶34

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶35

The prosecution allegation is that: the first accused is the husband of the third respondent. The accused 1 to 4 harassed and mentally and physically tortured the third respondent by demanding more dowry. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

¶36

Heard; Sri. R. Anas Muhammed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. C. S. Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Sri. Thareek T. S., the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent/defacto complainant.

¶37

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have amicably settled the dispute with the third respondent, who has voluntarily executed Annexure A3 affidavit, stating that she has no subsisting grievance against the

¶38

¶39

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶40

petitioners and she has no objection in all further proceedings in the above crime being quashed. Hence, the petition may be allowed.

¶41

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the Investigating Officer has ascertained and reported that the subject matter in dispute between the parties has been settled and the third respondent has voluntarily signed Annexure A3 affidavit.

¶42

The learned counsel for the third respondent also submitted that the dispute between the parties have been settled and the third respondent has voluntarily signed Annexure A3 affidavit. The said submission is recorded.

¶43

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab [2012 (10) SCC 303] and Prabatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and

¶44

¶45

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶46

others vs. State of Gujarat and another [(2017) 9 SCC 641] has held that in the facts and circumstances of a case and to secure the ends of justice, where the High Court is satisfied that an amicable settlement has been arrived at between the parties and the offence is not serious in nature involving mental depravity, criminal proceedings may be quashed.

¶47

On a consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, particularly after going through Annexure A3 affidavit sworn in by the third respondent, which has been found to be genuine and bona fide by the Investigating Officer, I am convinced and satisfied that this is a fit case to exercise the inherent power of this Court, particularly since the alleged offences are not serious in nature, no public interest in involved, the chances of conviction is

¶48

¶49

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶50

remote, the continuation of the proceeding would only be wastage of judicial time and the settlement would augur harmony in society. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition.

¶51

In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed by quashing Annexure A1 First Information Report (FIR) and Annexure A2 Final Report in Crime No.911/2022 of Chandera Police Station, Kasargod and all further proceedings in C.C. No.35/2023 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg, Kasargod, as against the petitioners.

¶52

The Crl.M.C is ordered accordingly.

¶53

Sd/C.S. DIAS JUDGE

¶54

¶55

¶56

Crl.M.C. NO.159 OF 2024

¶57

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 159/2024

¶58

PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES

¶59

Annexure A1A CERTIFIED COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT CRIME NO. 911/2022 OF THE
CHANDERA POLICE STATION

¶60

Annexure A2A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN
CRIME NO.911/2022 OF CHANDERA POLICE
STATION
Annexure 3ORIGINAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
30/12/2023 SWORN BY THE RESPONDENT 3

¶61

RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES: NIL

Sufaid v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sufaid 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saju J @ Saju Jose, Vs State of Kerala

Philomina P.C, Vs State of Kerala

Ravi Vs State of Kerala

V.S. Sooraj Ayyannar Vs State of Kerala

Sophia Naushad Khan Vs State of Kerala

Nazla P Vs State of Kerala