Allowed

Memon MD Amin Abdulrajjak v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Jul 2021CRLP/2915/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal petition and interim applications to quash proceedings in a matrimonial dispute case where the parties had executed a settlement deed and filed a compromise.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition and Interim Applications 1 and 2 of 2021 were allowed; the proceedings in C.C. No. 21213 of 2019 were quashed against the petitioners.

Memon MD Amin Abdulrajjak Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR or r"J#.oBhrE^{oF rELANGANA} THURSDAY, THE TWEN rw o'r H bii'i i'JIYNBffiNTNDTD#,! F J u L^y

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶4

I.A. N os. 1& 2 OF ?021

¶5

IN/AND

¶6

CRI M INAL PETITI ON NO :29150F 2021

¶7

l.A. NOs. 1 &2 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt.Fahmida Ba Occ. Household. Hyderabad. Telan .ml{u:"i.,,i",**ff 6g;9rffi r!,.,,;tr:

¶10

And

¶11

¶12

2^{eff;ii:4:i1h1gi"gffi ;t+iltrghgise;ssu} i;I[:["^If ffi .r{H::,#[:jf tHf^{3;:r"",ri:!@#,r,[3:ei?r}

¶13

J sri Memon abdurraiiak ahdur .rehman, @ Abdur Razzak Haji Rehman r,4emon s/o Arlemon Abdur^'irehman vorrJnJboYai,'TgLi"riort 63 years, occ. Nir, Resident of House no.45, IVloin pirti. Niolai, (r.r"""01, Grr"t 387001,

¶14

4 9rt^{Rubina Suriya} @ Rubina Banu, W/o Sajid Suriya, Aoed. 38. occ. Housewife. R/rj -2.-rr/eeniprru'rir-kr,,l#"c"r"#v s".iiiv, arGYJin"ji, Anand, Gujarat, 388001. .. nesp6nOenG / Accused 1 to 4

¶15

5 The State reptd. By the Public prosecutor High - Court of Judicature at Hyderabad. ... RespondenURespondent

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under section 320 (6) of R/w. 482 cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances slated in the ltlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to permit the petitio ners/Defacto complainant for compounding of the offence in C.C.No.21213 of 2019 arising out of Crime No.i88 of 2019 of p.S. W.P.S. South Zone, Hyderabad District, pending on the file of Hon'ble Court of XV Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Nampally, Hyderabad District. ln the interest of justice.

¶18

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶19

Petition under Section 320 (2) of Cr.P.C R/w. Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C.praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to permit the petitioners/Defacto complainant to record

¶20

the compromise^{in criniinal case in C C'No'21213 ol 2019 arising out of Crime} No.188^{of 2019 of PS/VPSSouth Zone' Hyderabad District' pending on the file of} Hon'ble^{Courlof the X'V Addl Chief MetropolitanMagistrate' Nampally' Hyderabad} District.^{in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case}

¶21

Crl.^P etiti^{onNo.2915 c,f 202',1}

¶22

Betwe en: 1. , "rno^{n Md Ami n AbgYlf sll' E"tss" IEl'il"*::Hl',3f ilrf3l I} "i?,5ff^..t{{

¶23

f,?".Yj.:r*:U:^{,9.:,.",Y%3?"d6fij,Jiniiv i"."noinsat oo-hioatar,(Rept.Bv His} GPA Holder.vr^{salro surrvi b)O M;#!;aYal<u"b SurivaAqed 44 Yearslvo} 7, tvlina Park.^{Near Knoia Jfft;Bii;6 ioio' nnano' Gliarat-388001'}

¶24

1. Smt.Fareeda^Baro .W/o^{Memon Abdulrajjak Abdul F"l',i:@#i.:} [3f'#i?+ [SlHl"YETf;^{I;;.}',:fl R::,:?,'i'""'T:bffi ?t"?'i"d'}

¶25

.) Sri. Memon^{AbdulrajjakAbdul Rehman' @.Abdul RazzakHaii Rehman Memon} S/o Memon Abdul^{Renm?ri'rviJi'iinltiun-"i' Agedabout} ^6^3-JS.""'^{occ Nil'} Hl:.ij'"i'i5i^{r-rb,lJ" no.as,r,ioin FJr[. r'tuoiao, rrr-eaa,Gurat 387001'}

¶26

'' 4. Smt. Rubina^Suriya @^{Rubina Banu,W/o^ Sajid Suriya'} -^Aged38' 6'"[. n,ir.ij*t"1ft)6^{-z,"ueenl-pJrrn#r khoja colonv socieiv'BhalejRoad'} Anand, Gujarat,^388001.

¶27

.PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶28

AND 1 The state of Telangana,^{reptd.by the Public Prosecutor High court of Judicature} at Hyderabad

¶29

2 Smt.Fahmida Banu,^{D/o Siddik Aedul Sattar [/lemon, Aged about 31y-ears,} OcC. fforr"nold. R/o^{H.No.20-7-439,KamanMohammedShukur, Fateh} Oi*^.i, Hyderabad,^Telanagana State.^{...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO} COMPLAINANT

¶30

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying thatin the circumstancesstated}

¶31

in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,^{the High Court may be pleased} to quash the^pending criminal case in C.C.No.21213 of^{2019 arising out of Crime} No.1BB of 2019 ol \A/.P.S. South Zone, Hyderabad District^pending on the file of Hon'ble Court of the XV Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally. Hyderabad District against the petitioners/accused 1 to 4 in the interest of^justice and in the circumstances set forin to above.

¶32

These Petitions coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Crimirral Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. [t/ohammed Zaki, Advocate for the Petitioner in Crl.Petition and Respondent Nos_ 1 to 4 in l.A. Nos. I & 2 of 2021 and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in Crl.Petition and Respondent No. 5 in LA. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2021 and of Sri. Mazhe. Hussain, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 in Crl.petition and Petitioner in l.A. Nos. 1 and 2 of 2021 .

¶33

The Court made the fr:llowing: COMMON ORDER

¶34

¶35

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

I.A.Nos. 1&2of2O21

IN/AND

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2915 OF 2021

¶40

COMMON ORDER:

¶41

This Criminal Petition is filed by^{the petitioners/accused} Nos. 1 to 4 to quash the^{proceedings in C'C'N o.21273 of 2019,} on the file of XV Additional^{Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,} Hyderabad, registered for^{the offences punishable under} Sections 498-A,^{406, 506 of IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of} Dowry Prohibition^{Act, 1965.}

¶42

During the^{pendency of the presentCriminal} Petition, the^{parties have compromisedthe matter and'} accordingly,^{respondentNo.2 filed I'A'Nos' Iand 2 of 2O2lto} permit them to compound^{the offence and compromisethe} matter and accordingty^{quash the proceedingsagainst the} petitioners in^{C'C.No.212L3 of 2Ol9'}

¶43

Vide order^{dated 09'04'202 l,this Court' after} recording the^{submissions made by the learned counsel for} the petitioner^{as well as respondent No'2' directed the parties} to appea"r^{before the Secretary, Telangana High CourtLegal} Services^{Committee,Hyderabad' for their identificationand} directed^{the Secretaryto submit a report by 22.04,2021, In} compliance^{of the said order, the Secretary,Telangana High} Court Le!a<sup>ServicesCommittee has submittedhis report dated 30.06.2021.

¶44

In the report dated 30.06.2021 of the Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, it is stated that on ora.l examination, respondent No.2/complajnant has stated that she has filed a complaint against the petitioners/ accused Nos. 1 to 4 and the same has been registered as Crime No.1gg,of 2Ol9 for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 506 of IpC and Sections 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1965, later it was numbered as C.C.No.21213 of 2019, on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and that now she has approached this Court for recording the compromise with the petitioners/ accused Nos. I to 4.

¶45

'Ihe parties herein have filed joint memo of compromise. The said joint memo of compromise and the report of the Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, are placed on record.

¶46

In view of the said report and also in view of the compromide entered between the petitioners and respondent No.2, I.A.Nos. 1 and 2 of 2O2l are allowed. Consequently, the Criminai petition 1S allowed and the proceedings tn C.C.No.2 t213 of 2019, on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, are herebv quashed against the petitioners / accused Nos. 1 to 4.

¶47

¶48

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand

¶49

closed.

¶50

¶51

SD/.8. SATYAVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR lP //rRUE copy/t

¶52

SECTION OFFICER

¶53

¶54

The XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, WPS South Zone, Hyderabad. 3. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderaba.d (OUT)

¶55

One CC to Sri. Mohammed Zaki Advocate [OPUC]

¶56

One CC to Sri. Mazher Hussain, Advocate [OPUC]

¶57

kul

¶58

One Spare Copy

¶59

Two CD Copies - (Along with a copy of Joint memo of compromise) .)r'

HIGH COURT

DATED: 221A7 n0Z1

COMMON ORDER

t.A. NOS. 1&2cF 2021

IN / AND

CRLP.No.291S ot 2021

lHE S14 rc
o
k
+
...'.r
oo
r0 7 AUs202t

¶68

ALLOWING THE CRL.PETITION AND I.A. NOS. 1 AND 2 OF 2021

¶69

¶70

¶71

lN THE HIGH couRT or LuoljlylRE Ar HvDERABAD FoR rHE srArE OF TELANGANA

CRL.IU.P.NO

oF 2021

CRL.P:NO. OF 2021

Between:

MEMON MD AMIN ABDULRAJJAK S/o lt4emon Abdulrajjak Abdul Rehman,Aged about 36 years, Occupation: Pvt Service, Presenfly resending at Doha eatar, (Rept. By His GPA Hotder.tr4r. SAJID SURtyA S/o tMOHAt\rAD YAKUB _ SURIYA, Aged 44 Years, R/o 7, lVina Park , Near Khoja Colony, Bha ej Road, Anand, Gujarat-388001 .

¶78

SMT.FAREEDA BANO Wo [/lemon Abdulrajjak Abdul Rehman \ @Abdul^{Razzak Haji RehmanN4emon,} Aged about 58^years, Occupation: l-lousewife,

¶79

SRI. MEMON ABDULRAJJAK ABDUL^REHMAN @^{Abdul Razzak Haji Rehman fi/lemon S/o l\4emonAbdul Rehman} tMohanadbhai, Aged about 63^years, Occ:^Nil,

¶80

SMT. RUBINA SURIYA @^RUBINA,BANU, 1:. i/,^" Wo Sajid Suriya, Aged^{: 38, Occ: Housewife,} ... Petitioners/accused^{1 to 4.}

¶81

And

¶82

The State,^{reptd.by the Public Prosecutor,} High Court of Judicature^{at Hyderabad'}

¶83

SMT.FAHMIDA^{BANU D/o SIDDIK ABDUL SATTARtvlEI\4ON'} Aged about 31 Years,^{Occ: Household,} R/o H.No.20-7-439,^{Kaman[VlohammedShukur,} lri.f' o"*r.a,^{Hyderabad, TelanaganaState} -Respondents/ Respondents/Defacto^Complainant

¶84

JOINT^{T/E[/O FILE D BY PETITIONERSANDRES PONDEN T NO.2}

¶85

May it Please Your^LordshiP:

¶86

It is submitted^{by the petitioners1 to 4 herein and the respondent No 2} hereinthatthewellwishersandeidersofbothfamiliesintervenedinthematter andrequiredthepetitionershereinandtherespondentNo.2hereintosettlethe dispute^{by entering into a compromise upon which the petitioners herein and the} respondentNo.2agreedforexecutingthe.,tVlElVloRANDUlVoFI/ATRItvloNlAL SETTELIvIENT^{CUI\4OULA COIMPROIUISE" on 03'd March' 2021 the Settlement} was reduced^{into writing and signeclby the petitioners herein and the} Respondent^{No.2 herein in presenceof the yvitnesses'} "'2'

¶87

¶88

-2-

¶89

towards full and^{final settlementthe Petitioner No.1 agreedto pay in all a sum of} Rs.10,00,000/-^{(RupeesTenLakh} )^{as mentionedin'the said settlementDeed to} the respondent No.2 herein^{which was} accepted^{by the respondentNo 2 and} signed the Settlement Deed in^presettce of the^{witnesses. The copy of} Settlement Deed^{"MEMORANDUT\4} OF MATRIIVIONIAL SETTELIVIENT CUM QULA COIVPROMISE' on 03'd March, 2021 is filed before this Hon'ble Court along with the Quash Petition. Therefore it is just necessary and proper in the interest of justice to permit the petitioners and the respondent No.2 herein to compromise the case.

¶90

¶91

Therefore it is just necessary and proper in the interest of justice to permit the petitioners and the Respondent No.2 to compromise the criminal case in c.c.No.2'1213 of 2019 arising out of crime No.'rBB of 20r9 of w.p,s. south Zone, Hyderabad District now pending on the fire of Hon,bre court of the XV Addr chief t\4etropolitan t\4agistrerte, Nampalry, HycJerabd District in the interest of justice and in the circumstances of the case.

¶92

Date: -03-2021 Hyderabad.

¶93

I^{2trd2{ z'ax a-',,,-} Petitioner Nb.1/Accused No..1 . Through G.p.A. Holder. h),r *{C r Gr-,] Z"rf<,zS Pefitioner No.2/Accused No.2.

¶94

*^{/nptrlt </sup> Petitioner No.3/Accused No.3.}

¶95

Co ttn itioners 1 to 4

¶96

fnr.rioA Brnu Respondent No.2 I q Counsel o spon No.2;.-*

¶97

Ii,

Memon MD Amin Abdulrajjak v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Memon MD Amin Abdulrajjak v. The State of Telangana

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

Pathepuram Naveen Vs The State of Telangana

Redcarpet Tech Private Limited Vs The State of Telangana

Dmi Finance Private Limited Vs the State of Telangana

Smt. Kantimahanti Padma Vs The State of Telangana Rep by its P.P

V. Aditya Vs State of Telangana, And Another

Rajaganesh Chandrasekaran Vs The State of Telangana