Allowed

Syed Zakiuddin , Urooj and another v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC18 Mar 2021CRLP/64/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana allowed criminal petitions under Section 482 CrPC and Section 320 CrPC to quash proceedings in Crime No. 471 of 2019 alleging kidnapping of a son and wife. The Court observed the dispute was matrimonial in nature, the parties had compromised, and the offences were not heinous, ordering the quashing of the case.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition No. 64 of 2021 and I.A. Nos. 3 and 4 of 2021 allowed; proceedings in Crime No. 471 of 2019 quashed against Petitioners.

Syed Zakiuddin , Urooj and another Vs The State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY. THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF I'/ARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K,LAKSHMAN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 64 OF 2021

¶6

ALONG WITH LA.NOS:3 & 4 OF²⁰²¹

¶7

Between:

¶8

Syed Zakiuddin @ Urooj, S/o Syed Azeezuddin Ali Khan,

¶9

Nazia Zaki Khan, W/o Syed Zakiuddin,

¶10

,..PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, rep.by its Public Prosecutor,^{High Court for the State of} Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶13

Moin-ul-lslam Samar, S/o. Anwar-ul-Haq,

¶14

...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶15

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P .C^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court^{maybe pleased} to QUASH the F.l.R. No.471 of 2019 on the file of Golkonda^{PoliceStation,} Hyderabad City

¶16

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶17

Petition under Section 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 stay all further^proceedings in F.l.R. No.471 of 2019 on the file of the Golkonda Police Station, Hyderabad City including appearance of the^petitioners / Accused¹ and 2.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri AJAY KULKARNI, Advocate for the Petitioners and of the Assistant Public Prosecutor (TG/AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri H.Venugopal, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

¶19

l.A. NO: 3 OF 2021

¶20

Betwee n

¶21

Moin-ul-lslam Samar, S/o. Anwar-ul-Haq, Ryo.6-2-43, Dastagir Villa, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad-500 004. State of Telangana.

¶22

..... Petitioner/RespondenUDefacto Complainant

¶23

And

¶24

'1 . Syed Zakiuddin @ Urooj, S/o Syed Azeezuddin Ali Khan, R/o. H.No.8-1-21l87, Suryanagar, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.

¶25

1. Nazia Zaki Khan, W/o Syed Zakiuddin, R/o.H.No.8-1-21187, Suryanagar, Tolichowki, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶26

The State of Telangana, rep.by its Public^{Prosecutor, High Courtfor the State of} Telangana' at Hyderabad'

¶27

......Respondent/ Defacto complainant

¶28

Petition under Section 320(6) of^{Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourt may be} pteased to permit the petitioner to file the^{quash petition compounding the non-} compoundable offences of^{Sec. 363 and 365 IPC in F.l.R.No. 471 of 2019 on the} file of the Golkonda Police Station,^{HyderabadCity.}

¶29

l.A. NO: 4 OF 2021

¶30

Between:

¶31

lvloin-ul-lslam Samar, S/o. Anwar-ul-Haq,^{F/o.6-2-43, Dastagir Villa, A.C Guards,} Hyderabad-SOO 004. state of relangana.

¶32

.....petitioner/comprainant

¶33

And

¶34

Sved Zakiuddin @ Urooj,^{s/o Syed Azeezuddin Ali Khan,Fl/o.H.No.8-1-21l87,} 2. SLrvanaqar Colonv, Tolichowki, Naiia Z-aki Khan; W/o^{Syed 'Zakiuddin, Hyderabad.Fi/o.H.No.B-1-21l87,Suryanagar'} Tolichowki' Hyderabad'

¶35

...RESpoNDENTS/AccusED No.1^{& 2}

¶36

The State of Telangana,^{rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High courtfor the state of} Telangana' at Hyderabad

¶37

......Respondent No.1/Respondent^No.3

¶38

Petition under Section³²⁰⁽²⁾ of^{cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the High court may be} pleased to record the compromise and^{quash the proceedings by way of} compounding the offences^{against the petitioner in F.l.R. No.47'1of 2019 on the file} of the Golkonda Police Station

¶39

This Petition coming on for^{hearing, upon perusingthe ltrlemorandumof} Grounds of criminal Petition and^{upon hearing the argumentsof sri H.Venugopal,} Advocate for the Petitioners in^{lA Nos.3 and 4 and of the Assistant Public} Prosecutor^(TG/AP) on behalf^{of the RespondentNo.3 in lA Nos.3 & 4 and R1 in} crl.P.No.64/2021 and ol Sri AJAY^{KULKARNI, Advocatefor the RespondentNos.1} & 2 in lA Nos.3 & 4 and R2^{in Crl.P.No.64/2021.}

¶40

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶41

l{OYl}Ll- SRI ,It S ilCI- K. LAKSH}IA\ CRIIII\AL l'}E I't-l'lON No.6.l OF 202I .{LO(; \ ITI'l I.A. \os.-3 A\D I OF 2021

¶42

('oNll\t()N otil)LR

¶43

'I'he present Crinrinal Pcrition is llled under Section - 482 of the Code olCriminal Procedure. I973, to quash the proceedings in Ct.ime No.471 ol- 2019 of Golkorrda Police Station, Hyderabad Commissionerate.^'lhe petitioners herein are accused Nos.I and 2 in the said crime. The offences alleged against them are under Sections - 363 and 365 ofthe Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short'IpC').

¶44

Heard Mr. Ajay Kulkami, leamed counsel for the petitioners, Mr. H. Venugopal, leamed counsel for respondent No.2 - and the learned Assistanr Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.l - Statc..

¶45

l he alleeations aeainst the petitioners herein are that respondent No.? got ntarried Mr. Nada Zaki Khan on 25.12.20il2. -[hey blessed with a rnale child. t.ater, disputes arose between him and his wilt as rn'ell as her thr-r-rily nterrbers' vz., her mother and sister and sister's husband, petitioners herein and other relatives. They have lodged complaints against each other viz., Crime No.304 of 2019 of Saifabad Police Station, Hyderabad City registered against respondent No.2 herein on the complaint lodged by his wife's sister and others; Crime No.227 of 2019 of Women^police Station, CCS, Hyderabad registere$for the offences under Sections - 4984, 406 and 506 oflpC and Sections - 4 and (r o1' the [)owrv prohibition Act, 196l on the

¶46

('tl P \ta.61 af 20)()

¶47

complaint lodged by respondenr No.2 herein against his u,ife; and Crirne No.53 ol20l9 of Station Bazar. [)olicc Station. CLrlbarga. Thcissues in the said crimes were settled pllrsuant to the compromise entered between the parties. Even, wife of respondent No.2 herein has filed W.P. No.23369 of 20 19 before this Courr on 24.10.2019 to declare the action of respondents therein in issuing Lookout Notice No.161/LOC/CCSDD/T{YDl20l9, dated 02.08.2019 against her in FIR No.304 of 2019 as illegal. This Court vide order dated 25.10.2019, disposed of the said writ petition pursuant to the compromise entered between the parties. As per the terms and conditions of the memorandun-r of compromise. respondent No.2 went to the house of his wit'e situated at SLrrva Nagar.. Torvli Chou,ki. Hyderabad to pick up his son. But, he tbund the house was lockecl and his wife rnobile was switched oft. Since he has disputes u,ith his co-brother, petitioner No.2 herein ancl his sistc-r-in-lar,v. petitioner No.l, and to settle their scores ivith him, they rnight have kidnapped his wife and son and wrongfully confined them.

¶48

It is further alleged that there is tkeat to his wife and son from the hands of petitioners herein and, therefore, he requested the police to take action against the petitioners herein.

¶49

On receipt of the said cornplainr, the police registered the case vide Crime No.47l of 20 l9 tbr the off-ences under Sections - 363 ancl 365 o1'IPC

¶50

KL,J Crl.P. No.64 of2020

¶51

¶52

The leamed counsel for the^{petitionerswouldsubmit that} during pendency ofinvestigation^{in the presentcrime, the pafties have} arrived at an anricable settlement and the^{lnatter was settledbetween} them and accordin-ql'. the parties have cntered^{into memoranduln of} corlprornisc leducing the tenrts artd conclitiorrs^thereinill "vriting.^In vieu of the sanre, he sought to cluash the^{proceedingsin the present} cflnte.

¶53

I.A. No.4 of 2021 is tiled by respondent^{No.2 to recordthe} compromise while I.A. No.3 ol 2021 is filed to^compoundthe offences by quashing the proceedings against him^{in the present} crime. Along with the said petitions, the^{parties havefileda joint} memo duly signed by both parties. Pursuant to the same,^{this Court} directed the parties to appear before the Registrar^{(Judicial -} I)^{for the} purpose of their identification and his report to that effect. Accordingly, the Registrar (Judicial - l) submitted his^reporton 24.02.201. The said^joint metno as well as report of the^Registraris placed on rccold.

¶54

8.^'l'he lcalnecl Assistant I)ublic Proseclrtor placing reliance^on tlie principle laid down by the Hon'ble Sr.rpreme Courl in The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayanr would submit that offences under Sections - 363 and 365 ol IPC are the offences against society and in view of the pararneters laid down by the Apex Court in the said

¶55

'^{20 r g (5) scc403}

¶56

(,ri t, ,t 61 t,r )r))r)

¶57

¶58

decision, the proceedings in the prescnt crinte cannot be quashed rnerely on the ground that the parties have entercd ir.rto a settlernenl.

¶59

In Vierv ol'the abor,e subrl)issions. it is relcVar-rt to ntcntion

¶60

the parameters laid dou,r-r bv rl're Apex Clourl irr Laxnri Narar,anl w'hicir are as under:

¶61

"i) that the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the riminal proceedings for the non-compoundable off'ences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantll, the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out ol matrimonial relationship or fhmill disputes and rvhcn thc lrarties llave rcsolvcd the cntire tlispulc rrrtt,rrt-u.st tltcrttir:lr c.:

¶62

ii) such porrer is nL)t to lre crcrcisctl in llrosc prosecutions rvhich involvetl heinous and serious offences ol'menlal depravity or ol'fbnccs like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;

¶63

iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the olfences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise betu,een the victinr and the offendel

¶64

iv) oifences undcr Section 307 lPC and the Arms Act etc. ri'ould fall in thc catcgoq o1'

¶65

KL,J Crl.P. No.61^{of 2020}

¶66

¶67

heinous and serious^{offences and thereforeare} to be treated^{as crime against the societyand} not against^{the individual alone, and therefore'} the criminal^{proceedings for the offence under} Section 307^{IPC and/or the ArmsAct etc' which} have a serious^{impact on the society cannot be} quashed in exoroise^{of porversunderSection} 482 ol thc Code.^{on the ground that the parties} havc rcsolred^{their entire dispute amongst} thcttrsclve^{s. I los er er. thc IJigh Court would not} rest its dccisi(ln^{tllcrelr lrccitttse thcre is a} nrention^{ot' Scction 107 IPC in the [l[( or the} charge is Iiamccl^{urlclcr this provision'It would} be opct]^{to the I tigh Court to examine as to} rvhether incorporation^{of Section307 IPCis} there lor the^{sakeof it or the prosecutionhas} collected sufficient^{evidence, whichif proved'} would lead to^{framing the charge under Section} 307 IPC.^{For this purpose,it wouldbe open to} the High^{Court to go by the nature of injury} sustained, whether^{suchinjuryis inflictedon the} vital/delegate^{parts of the body, nature of} weapons uscd etc.^{However, such an exercise} b1' the High^{Courl rvould be permissible only} alier the evidencc^{is collccted after invcstigation} atrcl tlrc charge^{shcct is liledichargeis ll'amed} anclior clttrirlg^{the 1rial. Such exercise is not} pcrmissiblc^{s'hen the mattcr is still under} invcstigation.^{Theretbrc. theultimate} cottclLtsion^{in paragraphs19'6and 29'7 of the} clccision^{ol'this Clourt in thc case ol'Narinder} Singh^{(supra) should be read harrnoniouslyand} to be read^{as a rvhole and in the circumstances} stated hereinabove;

¶68

( t! l) ,,6J,,t :t):tl

¶69

¶70

v) while excrcising the po*.cr uncicr Section 482 of the Code ro quash the crirninal proceedings in respect of. non-compoundable offences, which are privatc in nature and do not have a serious illlpart on society. on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Courr is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enlcr into a corrprotnise etc."

¶71

I0. In view of the abovc pararreters laicl cjou,n by the Apex court, coming to the case on hand. the petitioners herein are sisterin-law and co-brother of respondent No.2 herein. The allegations againsr them in the cornpiaint datecl 0 L 12.2019 lodged by respondent No.2 herein are that there are disputes between thern and out of said disputes, the petitioners might have kidnapped wile and son of respondent No.2 and wrongfully confined them. Thus, it is clear that respondent No.2 has lodged the present complaint only on suspicion. It is rerevant to note that on the complaint lodged by the wife of respondent No.2, Women police Station, central Crime Station, have registerecr a case vide crime No.227 of20l9 for the offences uncler Sections - 49gA,406 and 506 of IPC and Sections - 4 and 6 ol the Dou.rv prohibition Act. .fhe police alier cotnpletio, ol- inr.,esrieatiurr. ll lecl char_ue shcet agai,st respondent No.2 and the sante \ as taken on ti le by learnecl Xl II

¶72

KL,J Crl. P. No.64 of 2020

¶73

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, vide C.C. No.18264 of 2019. Respondent No.2 herein has fiied Crl.P. No.74 of 2021 to quash the said proceedings against him basing on the compromise entered betrveen the parlies, and this Court vide order 1 l.0l.l0l ). cluaslred the saicl proceedines. Similarll', on the contplaint lodgecl b1 resl:ronclenl No.l herein, the Station House Olllcer. Sailabacl I)olice Station. Hyderabad, have registered a case vide Crime No.i0-1 oi 2019 against his rvife, her sister and others lbr the ofl'ences under Sections -^,157 and 380 of IPC. Since the parties arrived at scttlement, thel' filed Criminal Petition No.73 of 202 I before this Courl to quash the proceedings in the said Crime No.304 of 2019, and this Court vide order dated 11.02.2021, quashed the proceedings in the said crime. Along with the present petition, the parlies have filed the copies of petition in G & WC No.02 of 2020 filed by respondent No.2 herein against his wife under Sectior.r - 23, Rule - 3 read with 151 of CPC (compromise petition) and order dated 19.09.2020 passed by the Distlict Judge, Familv Court. Kalaburagi. r'ccorcling compromise between thern lr ith ccrtain conclit ions.

¶74

I l. The above stated tacts u'ould reveal tltat there is close relatior.rship benveen the petitioners herein and respondent No.2. It appears that there are disputes betu,een tl're petitioners, respondent No.2 and his wife. As discussed above, the other proceedings were ended in compromise. More over, the disputes between the parties

¶75

( rl l' \0 61 ol )t)2(t

¶76

¶77

are matrinlonial disputes. Thus. this CoLrrt is inclined to quash rlre proceedings in the present crime. Accordingl1,. I.A. Nos.3 and 4 are allowed.

¶78

In view of the above discussion, I.A. Nos.3 and 4 are allowed permitting the parties to enter into compromise and to compound the offences alleged against the petitioners herein. Consequently, the present Criminal Petition is allowed. and the proceedings in Crime No.zlT l ol'20 l9 ol Golkonda Police Station. Hyderabad Comrnissionerate are herebv quashed against the petitiorlers helein - accLrsecl Nos. i ancl l.

¶79

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions. il' an1'" pencling in the Crinrinal Petition shall stancl closccl.

¶80

Sd/-K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// l,,SECTION OFFICER

¶81

¶82

1 The XVll Additional Chief Metropolitan [\ilagistrate, at^Hyderabad. 2 The Station House Officer, Golkonda Police Station,^{Hyderabad City.} 2 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of^Telangana, Hyderabad (OUT)

¶83