Disposed

Shaik Hasham, v. Md. Fathima

Telangana HC22 Mar 2016CRLP/3961/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the petition to quash proceedings under Sections 417 and 420 IPC arising from an alleged love-judgment betrayal. While refusing quashal due to clear evidence, the Court directed police to investigate without arresting the accused unless necessary, requiring an undertaking for appearance.

What did the court decide?

Police directed not to arrest petitioner; directed to complete investigation issuing notice only; petitioner to give undertaking.

Shaik Hasham, Vs Md. Fathima — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.3961 OF 2016

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings against him in FIR No.109 of 2016 on the file of Ramachandrapuram Police Station, Medak District, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 417 and 420 IPC.

¶4

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶5

It is alleged that the 1^st respondent and the petitioner fell in love and that the petitioner promised to marry her and had sexual intercourse with her. Later, the petitioner got marriage engagement with another lady. When the 1^st respondent questioned the petitioner, he refused to marry her.

¶6

It is the case of the petitioner that he filed a private complaint against the 1^st respondent and her family members for the offence punishable under Sections 384, 448, 503, 506 and 120-B r/w 34 IPC and the same was referred to the police, basing on which a crime was registered against the 1^st respondent and her family members, and as a counter blast to the said complaint, the 1^st respondent filed the present complaint.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegations made in the complaint, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief sought by the petitioner.

¶8

At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to pendency of the above crime, the petitioner apprehends arrest and harassment in the hands of the 2^nd respondent-police.

¶9

In view of the above submission, the 2^nd respondent-police are directed to complete the investigation and file a final report, if any, in accordance with law, without arresting the petitioner. In the event of

¶10

necessity, the 2^nd respondent-police are directed to issue a notice to the petitioner for the purpose of investigation. On issuance of such notice, the petitioner is directed to appear before the investigating officer and give an undertaking as to his future appearance as and when required by the investigating agency for the purpose of investigation.

¶11

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Date : 22.3.2016 Nn

¶13

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶14

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3961 OF 2016

¶15

DATED 22.3.2016

¶16

Shaik Hasham, v. Md. Fathima

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaik Hasham, v. Md. Fathima

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

Javeed Khan Vs The State of Telangana

M.Radha Krishna Reddy, Vs R.Dhana Laxmi

Smt.M.Shakunthala Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

N.R.Hari Babu and Another Vs State of Telangana and Another

S.Siva, Vs The State

S Venkatrama Raju Vs State of Andhra Pradesh