Sk. Mahaboob Jan and Others Vs. State

Sk. Mahaboob Jan and Others vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Andhra Pradesh Decided Apr 25, 1999

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/435836

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/435836
Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judge: Bilal Nazki, J.
Decided On: Apr 25, 1999
Case Number: Crl. P No. 1614 of 1999
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal - quashing of conviction - Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - petitioners No. 1 to 5 convicted under Section 498-A and petitioner No. 6 tried separately for same offence - petition filed to quash sentence passed on petitioners No. 2 to 6 - as appeal a...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 498-A; Constitution of India - Article 142

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sk. Mahaboob Jan and Others

Advocate Mr. B. Rajendra, Adv.

Respondent

State

Advocate Public Prosecutor

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 498-A; Constitution of India - Article 142
Reported In: 1999(3)ALD391; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)674; 1999(3)ALT620

Excerpt

criminal - quashing of conviction - section 482 of criminal procedure code, 1973 and section 498-a of indian penal code, 1860 - petitioners no. 1 to 5 convicted under section 498-a and petitioner no. 6 tried separately for same offence - petition filed to quash sentence passed on petitioners no. 2 to 6 - as appeal already pending no question to quash conviction - held, no exercise of inherent powers by court in contrary to statute thus quashing order not passed. - .....taken up and the appeal is pending. since an appeal is pending before the competent court this court will not consider quashing of the conviction and sentence against petitioners 2 to 5 in proceedings under section 482 cr.pc. as far as the quashing of the case against petitioner no.6 is concerned it would amount to ordering compounding of an offence which is not compoundable because the only ground stated in the petition is that the husband and wife compromised the matter therefore proceedings should be quashed. thismatter is no longer res-integra and has already been decided by a full bench of this court in suit. ghousia sultana v. mohd. ghouse baig, 1996 (2) ald 428 (fb). reference was made to supreme court judgment in mahesh chand v. state of rajasthmi, : 1988 crilj121 . this judgment was also taken into consideration by the full bench of this court and the court found that the order passed by the supreme court was referrable to article 142 of the constitution of india which stands altogether on a different footing. the law as enunciated by the supreme court in a.r. antulay v. r.s. nayak, : 1988 crilj1661 , still holds the field that the courts cannot pass directions in exercise of inherent powers which are contrary to the statute.3. for these reasons, this petition is not maintainable which is accordingly dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, Petitioner No. 1 to 5 have been convicted under Section 498-A i PC and they have filed an appeal against the conviction which is pending before the Sessions Judge. Petitioner No.6 was also accused of the same offence in the same case but was not available when the others were tried therefore he is being tried now separately. Petitioner No.l is the wife of petitioner No.6 on whose motion the Police had registered a case under Section 498-A IPC. This petition has been filed seeking quashing of the sentence passed on petitioners 2 to 5 and the prosecution against petitioner No.6.

2. There is no question of quashing the conviction and sentence of petitioners 2 to 5 as the accused-petitioners have the remedy of appeal which they have already taken up and the appeal is pending. Since an appeal is pending before the competent Court this Court will not consider quashing of the conviction and sentence against petitioners 2 to 5 in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.PC. As far as the quashing of the case against petitioner No.6 is concerned it would amount to ordering compounding of an offence which is not compoundable because the only ground stated in the petition is that the husband and wife compromised the matter therefore proceedings should be quashed. Thismatter is no longer res-integra and has already been decided by a Full Bench of this Court in Suit. Ghousia Sultana v. Mohd. Ghouse Baig, 1996 (2) ALD 428 (FB). Reference was made to Supreme Court judgment in Mahesh Chand v. State of Rajasthmi, : 1988 CriLJ121 . This judgment was also taken into consideration by the Full Bench of this Court and the Court found that the order passed by the Supreme Court was referrable to Article 142 of the Constitution of India which stands altogether on a different footing. The law as enunciated by the Supreme Court in A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, : 1988 CriLJ1661 , still holds the field that the Courts cannot pass directions in exercise of inherent powers which are contrary to the statute.

3. For these reasons, this petition is not maintainable which is accordingly dismissed.

Same Court & Year Andhra Pradesh · 1999 Same Parties Sk. Mahaboob Jan and Others vs State Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Bilal Nazki, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482; Indi...

Criminal