Allowed

Syed Noor Basha v. the State Rep. by

Madras HC22 Nov 2024CRL RC/1582/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal revision sought reversal of the dismissal of an application to recall a non-bailable warrant. With the defacto complainant confirming she no longer wished to pursue the case and a police-statement verifying it, the High Court set aside the dismissal, allowed recall of the warrant, and directed the parties to seek compounding before the Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal order set aside; warrant against petitioners recalled; parties directed to file a compounding application before the Magistrate; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Syed Noor Basha Vs the State Rep. by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 22.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶6

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.13152 of 2024

¶7

1.Syed Noor Basha 2.Raziya Begam 3. Imran 4.Yasmeen . .. Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The State Rep. By The Inspector, All Women Police Station, Poonamallee, Chennai - 600 066. 2.Reshma

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 438 of BNSS to call for the records of Crl.MP.No.5708 of 2024 in C.C.No.611 of 2023

¶12

on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Thiruvallur and set aside the dismissal order dated 29.04.2024.

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

1/5

¶15

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.G.S.Vivekanandan

¶17

For 1 st Respondent : Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana Govt. Advocate (Crl.side)

¶18

For 2 nd Respondent : Ms.G.S.Deepa

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The revision challenges the order passed by the learned Magistrate dismissing the petitioners' application for recall of non-bailable warrant under 70(2) which was filed without their presence.

¶21

2. When the case was taken up for hearing on an earlier occasion, the second respondent/defacto complainant was present in court and filed an affidavit stating that she is not interested in pursuing the case against the petitioners. This Court, on recording the said fact had directed the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the 1 st respondent to verify the genuineness of the statement made by the third respondent/defacto complainant.

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

2/5

¶24

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024

¶25

3. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the first respondent, on instructions, submitted that the parties were called to the police station and the second respondent had given a statement on 26.09.2024 to the effect that the she does not wish to pursue the case against the petitioners.

¶26

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as 2nd respondent and the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the 1 st respondent.

¶27

5. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel

¶28

for the petitioner that the parties have arrived at a compromise, which is confirmed by the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) and by the learned counsel for the second respondent, this court is of the view that the order impugned can be set aside and the warrant issued against the petitioner can be re-called. However, the petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate and file appropriate application alongwith the defacto complainant, for compounding, if permissible which shall be

¶29

3/5

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024

¶32

disposed of, in accordance with law.

¶33

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed and the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Thiruvallur in Crl.MP.No.5708 of 2024 in C.C.No.611 of 2023 on 29.04.2024 is set aside. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶34

2 2.11.2024

¶35

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order rgr

¶36

¶37

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Thiruvallur 2. The Inspector, All Women Police Station, Poonamallee, Chennai - 600 066.

¶38

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

¶39

4/5

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024

¶42

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

¶43

rgr

¶44

Crl.R.C.No.1582 of 2024

¶45

22.11.2024

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/5

Syed Noor Basha v. the State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Noor Basha v. the State Rep. by

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

Raja Vs the State Rep by Its

Vellachi v Arunachalam Vs Mr. Johny Chellappa

A.Aadhil Mon Vs State by

K.Sekar Vs State Rep. by

Santhosh Kumar Vs the State Rep by

Ranganathan Vs State Rep. by