High Court Kerala High Court

Anfil vs Khalid Hakkeem on 28 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
Anfil vs Khalid Hakkeem on 28 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 89 of 2010()


1. ANFIL, AGED 30 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ABDUL JABBAR, AGED 53 YEARS,
3. ANSALNA JABBAR, AGED 49 YEARS,
4. ASHNAMOL, AGED 19 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. KHALID HAKKEEM,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  :SRI.ASHIK K. MOHAMMED ALI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :28/01/2010

 O R D E R

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

————————————-
Cr. MC No.89 of 2010-C

————————————-
Dated 28th January 2010

Order

This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to have all further

proceedings and FIR in Crime No.995 of 2009, pending

before the Cheranelloor Police Station, quashed. The

petitioners are accused in the above said crime for

having committed the offences punishable under

Ss.498A and 304B read with S.34 IPC.

2. Jisma, the daughter of the 1st respondent was

married to the first petitioner. She died and there was an

allegation that it was due to the cruelty meted out to her

by the inmates of the family of the first petitioner. Based

on the complaint filed by the first respondent, Crime

No.995/09 was registered. A copy of the F.I.R. is

produced as Annexure A. It is stated that later, due to

the intervention of some well-wishers, the matter was

Cr. MC No.89/10 2

settled between the parties. The first respondent, the

father of the lady, who was the defacto complainant, has

stated that he had no further complaint in the matter and

the matter was settled.

3. I also heard the learned counsel appearing for

the first respondent, who submitted that the matter has

been settled between the parties and that no further

grievance subsists in the matter.

4. True, the offences disclosed are not

compoundable as offences are those punishable under

Ss.498A and 304B read with S.34 IPC. But, on going

through the allegations, it is found that the allegation of

commission of offence punishable under S.304B may

not be established. Considering the fact that the matter

is concerning the personal rights of the parties, it is felt

that holding the trial will be only a futile exercise.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The FIR in Crime

No.995 of 2009, pending before the Cheranelloor Police

Cr. MC No.89/10 3

Station is quashed and further proceedings in the said

case shall be dropped.

P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE

sta

Cr. MC No.89/10 4