Kerala High Court
Muad Marzook vs State Of Kerala Rep. By Public ... on 11 December, 2024
2024:KER:93938
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2024 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023
CRIME NO.87/2020 OF NEW MAHE POLICE STATION, Kannur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.1168 OF 2020 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,THALASSERY
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3:
1 MUAD MARZOOK
AGED 35 YEARS
'FATHIMA', NEAR KAKKADAVU VAYANASALA, POST
AZHIYOOR,VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DIST.KERALA,
PIN - 673309
2 SHAKEELA
AGED 53 YEARS
'FATHIMA' NEAR KAKKADAVU VAYANASALA, POST
AZHIYOOR,VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DIST.KERALA,
PIN - 673309
3 ALEEMA
AGED 32 YEARS
'FATHIMA' NEAR KAKKADAVU VAYANASALA, POST AZHIYOOR,
VATAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DIST.KERALA, PIN - 673309
BY ADVS.
T.ASAFALI
SMT.LALIZA. T.Y.
RESPONDENTS/STATE, THE COMPLAINANT & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI., PIN - 682031
CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 2
2024:KER:93938
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
NEW MAHE POLICE STATION, POST PARAL,THALASSERRY KANNUR
DIST.KEKRALA, PIN - 670671
3 HAMANA NIYAS
'SULUNAS' POST TEMPLEGATE, THALASSERRY, KANNUR
DIST.KERALA, PIN - 670102
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.12.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 3
2024:KER:93938
ORDER
Dated this the 11th December, 2024 Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.87/2020 of New Mahe Police Station, Kannur, now pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thalassery, as C.C. No.1168/2020. Petitioners seek quashment of the entire proceedings in the said calender case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.
3. Learned counsel would submit that the 1st accused is the husband of the defacto complainant. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are the mother and sister respectively of the 1st accused. The defacto complainant is the former wife of the 1st accused. Their marital relationship has been separated. The defacto complainant got re-married and is settled. Based on a private complaint thereafter preferred by the defacto complainant, which was forwarded under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, the crime in question was registered. On completion of investigation, Annexure A-3 final report was filed. The learned counsel would first CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 4 2024:KER:93938 invite the attention of this Court to Page No.9 of Annexure-A3 (running page No.37), wherein all what is seen stated is an omnibus allegation that accused Nos.1 to 3 have harassed the defato complainant physically and mentally, demanding more gold and money. Annexure A-3 final report does not answer the requirements of law, in the sense that, the role of each of the accused person is not specified, is the submission made. Learned counsel would then invite the attention of this Court to Annexure A-1 complaint, where also, no specific date or place is available as against the instances narrated in Annexure A-1. Learned counsel would point out that the ingredients of Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), are not satisfied in Annexure A-1 complaint, as also, in Annexure A-3 final report.
4. Relying upon the explanation to Section 498 A IPC, as regards the meaning of cruelty, learned counsel would submit that the conduct should be of such a nature, so as to drive a woman to commit suicide, or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health. In clause (b), the harassment of the woman should be with a view to CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 5 2024:KER:93938 coerce her to meet any unlawful demand for property or valuable security. These ingredients are not satisfied, is the contention urged. Learned counsel would submit that all proceedings culminating in the calender case afore referred are liable to be quashed.
5. Per contra, this application was seriously opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It was pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor that, Annexure-A1 complaint is exhaustive, which specifically narrates various instances, amounting to cruelty, so as to attract the offence under Section 498 A IPC. The same is the situation in Annexure A-3 final report also. The quashment sought for cannot be allowed, is the final submission made by the learned Public Prosector.
6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds that Annexure A-3 final report falls short of the requirements in terms of law.
7. It is essential to note that an accused person in a crime has to answer the specific allegations in the CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 6 2024:KER:93938 charge/final report. The legal requirement in this regard is that the allegations should be specific, so as to enable the accused to answer the same. This requirement is so fundamental for the accused to exercise his right of effective defence, a right which flows from Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the instant case, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the final report only contains a bald, vague and general allegation that accused Nos.1 to 3 - without specifying the role of each - have harassed the defacto complainant physically and mentally, demanding more gold and money. Such allegation in the final report will not enable the accused to answer the charges in exercise of their right to defence. The legal position in this regard is not res-integra. In Kahkashan Kausar & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors. [(2022) 6 SCC 599], even the quashment of an FIR was confirmed by the Supreme Court on the premise that the allegations are general and omnibus, without specifying the role of each accused in the offence. For the same reason that the allegations are vague and general, the Supreme court chose to quash the final report in Mahalakshmi & Ors. v. The State of Karnataka & Anr. CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 7
2024:KER:93938 (order in Criminal Appeal No.494/2023 dated 30.11.2023), wherein the absence of material evidence was also taken stock of. Both the afore referred decisions were rendered in the context of offence of Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. This Court therefore finds that Annexure A-3 charge sheet cannot be sustained in law and the same is therefore hereby quashed.
8. However, as regards the contention that Annexure A-1 complaint and all proceedings pursuant thereto are liable to be quashed, this Court cannot endorse the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. As pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, Annexure A-1 is reasonably exhaustive, which narrates various instances of cruelty. It cannot be said that going by Annexure A-1, the ingredients of the offence under Section 498 A are not made out prima facie, leave alone the correctness, veracity and genuineness of such allegations. The contention that none, other than the parents of the victims, have supported the prosecution version also does not impress this Court to quash Annexure A-1 complaint, or for that the matter, the proceedings pursuant thereto. It CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 8 2024:KER:93938 is settled that a conviction can be wholly rested on the sole testimony of a witness, provided in the same inspires full confidence in the mind of a court. Corroboration is required only when the sole testimony does not inspire such confidence. These are all matters to be established in trial and to be addressed by the trial judge. Any comment in this regard is likely to prejudice either of the parties, before the trial court. In the circumstances, the prayer to quash Annexure A-1 complaint and all proceedings pursuant thereto is declined.
9. The upshot of the above discussion is that this Crl.MC is allowed in part by quashing Annexure-A3 final report. In case, the investigating officer is convinced that the facts constitute the offence alleged, it will be open for him to file a fresh final report, in accordance with law, specifically enumerating the role of each accused as against the instances found if any, in the investigation.
10. It is clarified that, all the observations made in this order are only for the purpose of this Crl.MC and the trial court - on the event of filing a fresh final report, if any - will proceed with the matter, untrammeled by any CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 9 2024:KER:93938 of the observations contained in it. It is also clarified that all further proceedings in C.C. No.1168/2020, will remain quashed, subject to the right of the instigating officer to file a fresh final report, as envisaged herein above.
This Crl.MC is allowed in part, as above.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE AJ CRL.MC NO. 9432 OF 2023 10 2024:KER:93938 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 9432/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A-1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13-3-2020 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE COURT OF JUDICIAL I CLASS MAGISTRATE, THALASSERRY Annexure A-2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR NO.87/2020 OF NEW MAHE POLICE STATION Annexure A-3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 17-7-2020 FILED BEFORE THE COURT OF JUDICIAL I CLASS MAGISTRATE, THALASSERRY.
Annexure A-4 CERTIFIED COPY OF MEMO OF EVIDENCE Annexure A5 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED NIL OF HAMANA NIYAS[CW-2] RECORDED BY POLICE UNDER SECTION 161 OF CR.P.C. Annexure A-6 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED NIL OF MUHAMMED NIYAS CW-2 THE FATHER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT RECORDED BY POLICE UNDER SECTION 161 OF CR.P.C. Annexure A7 CERTIFIEID COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF SULFATH CW-3, RECORDED BY POLICE UNDER SECTION 161 OF THE CR.P.C. Annexure A8 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED NIL OF ZACKAKRIYA[CW-4] RECORDED UNDER SECTION 161 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Annexure A9 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED NIL OF ONE PREMANANDAN RECORDED UNDER SECTION 161 OF CR.P.C.