Kerala High Court
Muhammed vs State Of Kerala
Author: B.Sudheendra Kumar
Bench: B.Sudheendra Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/3RD BHADRA, 1939
Crl.MC.No. 1978 of 2017 (F)
---------------------------
CC 870/2015 of J.M.F.C., VADAKARA
CRIME NO. 454/2015 OF VADAKARA POLICE STATION
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:
---------------------
1. MUHAMMED,
S/O. ABDULLA, AGED 33 YEARS, KALARIYULLATHIL HOUSE,
CHANIYAMKADAVU P.O, THIRUVALLOOR, VADAKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
2. ASHRAF,
S/O. ABDULLA, AGED 36 YEARS, KALARIYULLATHIL HOUSE,
CHANIYAMKADAVU P.O, THIRUVALLOOR, VADAKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
3. NABEESA,
D/O. ABDULLA, AGED 31 YEARS, KALARIYULLATHIL HOUSE,
CHANIYAMKADAVU P.O, THIRUVALLOOR, VADAKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
VADAKARA POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
2. ASMA,
D/O. KUNHABDULLA, AGED 26 YEARS, PAYOLI HOUSE,
MAYIPOTH P.O, MEPPAYYUR (VIA), KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.
PIN - 673 524.
R2 BY ADV. SMT.V.K.HEMA
R2 BY ADV. SMT.V.K.MANJU
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-08-2017,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 1978 of 2017 ()
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
-----------------------
ANNEXURE I CERTIFIED COPY OF F.I.R. ALONG WITH PRIVATE COMPLAINT DATED
02.05.2015 OF VADAKARA POLICE STATION IN CRIME NO. 454/2015
DATED 06.05.2015.
ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. NO. 870/2015 IN CRIME
NO.454 OF 2015 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT, VADAKARA DATED 3.6.2015.
ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN MEPAYUR POLICE STATION CRIME NO.
324/2011.
ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 11.06.2012 RECORDED BY
THE MEPAYUR POLICE.
ANNEXURE V TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 11.06.2012 RECORDED BY
THE JFCM COURT, PAYYOLI.
ANNEXURE VI TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.11.2015 SEND BY THE FIRST
PETITIONER TO THE PARAKKOOL JUMA MASJID MAHALLU.
ANNEXURE VII TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KHASI OF
PARAKKOOL JUMA MASJID.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS ;- NIL.
-----------------------
True copy
P.A. to Judge
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.1978 of 2017
----------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2017
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.870/2015 on the files of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vadakara.
2. The prosecution case can be briefly stated thus:-
The 1st petitioner married the 2nd respondent on 7.2.2009 in accordance with their customary rights and thereafter they started residing as husband and wife in the house of the 1st petitioner. While so, the petitioners treated the 2nd respondent with cruelty for the purpose of extracting more dowry from her house.
3. On the said allegations, she filed a private complaint before the court below. The learned Magistrate forwarded the said complaint to the police for investigation and report under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the Crime was registered. After completing the investigation, the police filed the final report before the court for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A and 406 r/w Section 34 IPC.
Crl.M.C.No.1978/2017
..2..
4. The petitioners have filed this Crl.M.C. praying for quashing the final report and further proceedings against the petitioners in the above case.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. Annexure-III is the FIR registered by the police under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act on 05.10.2011 on the complaint of the uncle of the 2nd respondent that the 2nd respondent was found missing from 03.10.2011 with her minor child aged 2 years from the house of her husband. Annexure- V would show that the 2nd respondent surrendered before the learned Magistrate on 11.6.2012. The learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the 2nd respondent. She stated that she eloped with a person, namely, Navas on 3.10.2011 at 4 p.m. on her own volition. Annexure-IV is the statement of the 2nd respondent recorded by the police on 11.6.2012. The said statement would show that the 2nd respondent was in love with the above said Navas even before the marriage of the 2nd Crl.M.C.No.1978/2017 ..3..
respondent with the 1st petitioner. Thereafter, she eloped with the above said Navas on 3.10.2011 on her own volition along with her child. They went to Madras and resided there for six months. Thereafter, she came back to Kerala along with Navas and started residing in a rented house in Parappanagadi. On learning about the enquiry by the police about her, she surrendered before the learned Magistrate on 11.6.2012.
7. Annexure-VI is the 'Talaq' pronounced by the 1st petitioner whereby the 2nd respondent was divorced by the 1st petitioner on 24.11.2011. Annexure-VII is the letter issued from the Musaliyar of the Mahal concerned. Annexure-VII would show that the 1st petitioner divorced the 2nd respondent on 24.11.2011 and thereafter the 2nd respondent married the above said Navas.
8. The 1st petitioner is the former husband of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd petitioner is the brother and the 3rd petitioner is the sister of the 1st petitioner. The present complaint was filed before the court on 2.5.2015. The crime was registered by the police on 6.5.2015. Crl.M.C.No.1978/2017
..4..
9. It is clearly stated by the 2nd respondent in Annexure-V statement given to the learned Magistrate on 11.6.2012 that she had no complaint against any person. The 2nd respondent was leading a life with the above said Navas as husband and wife from 2011 onwards. After about 4 years of her divorce by the 1st petitioner and after about 4 years of her marriage with the above said Navas, the 2nd respondent filed the above complaint against her former husband and his siblings.
10. Having gone through the relevant inputs, I am of the considered view that after having eloped with a person during the subsistence of the marriage with the 1st petitioner and after having given statement before the police and the learned Magistrate immediately on surrender that she had no grievance against any person, the 2nd respondent cannot be heard to say, nearly after four years of divorce by the 1st petitioner and nearly after four years of the marriage of the 2nd respondent with her paramour, that she was treated with cruelty by her former husband and his siblings. Therefore, the Crl.M.C.No.1978/2017 ..5..
present complaint, which led to the registration of the crime and the filing of the final report, cannot be said to be a genuine complaint by an aggrieved person.
11. The facts and circumstances discussed above would clearly show that this is a typical example where the provisions of Section 498A IPC are blatantly misused.
12. In view of the above reasons, it is not just and proper to direct the petitioners to face the ordeal of the trial on the basis of the present complaint. In the said circumstances, I am inclined to quash the final report and further proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.870/2015 on the files of the court below in exercise of the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, I order so.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. stands allowed.
Sd/-
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE skj