Mohammed Noufal Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JANUARY 2013 11TH POUSHA 193 Crl.MC.No. 3576 of 2012 () ------------------------------------- CRIME NO.361/2011 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT ..... PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. MOHAMMED NOUFAL, S/O. MUHAMMED KUNHI, MADAKKAL, SOUTH THRIKARIPPUR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

2. JAMEELA M., W/O.MUHAMMED KUNHI, MADAKKAL, SOUTH THRIKARIPPUR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

3. JASSEERA M.K D/O.JAMEELA, MADAKKAL, SOUTH THRIKARIPPUR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

4. SALAM, KOTTI, PAYANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS SMT.P.K.PRIYA SRI.K.V.SREE VINAYAKAN SRI.K.M.HASHIR SRI.K.M.MUHAMMED HUSSAIN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING S.I OF POLICE,CHANDERA POLICE STATION.

2. ARIFA K.C., D/O.MOHAMEDKUNHI HAJI, P.A.MANZIL, EDACHAKKAI UDINOOR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.V.H.JASMINE R2 BY ADV. SRI.A.L.GEORGE THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss CRMC. NO.3576/2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A1:- COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.364/2011 ON THE FILE OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION. A2:- COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 7.11.2012. A3:- COPY OF THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN BY THE DEFACT COMPLAINANT DTD. 7.11.2012. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 3576 of 2012 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the F.I.R. and all further proceedings in C.C. No.1043/2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Hosdurg.

2. The petitioners are the accused in the above case. The first petitioner is the husband of the defacto complainant, the second petitioner is the mother of the first petitioner, the third petitioner is the sister of the first petitioner and the 4th petitioner is the uncle of the first petitioner. The second respondent is the defacto complainant and in connection with the dispute between the petitioners and the second respondent, a complaint happened to be filed alleging offence under Section 498A read with Section 34 I.P.C. Annexure A1 is the copy of the F.I.R.

3. Subsequently, the disputes have been settled and it is averred in para 2 of petition that they have decided to separate and the defacto complainant has agreed to receive Rs.2.5 lakhs from the first petitioner towards settlement. Annexure A2 is the copy of the agreement. Annexure A3 is the copy of the affidavit sworn by the defacto complainant. Crl.M.C.No.3576/2012 -2- 4. Heard both sides.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent also submitted that the entire disputes have been settled.

6. In the light of the principles stated by the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012 (4) KLT 108), this Court will be justified in exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the further proceedings. The case arose purely on a private dispute between the parties and in the light of the fact that the parties have sorted out their differences, no further purpose will be served by proceeding with the criminal complaint. Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C. No.1043/2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Hosdurg stand quashed. No costs. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) kav/