IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3378 of 2008()
1. NAFEENA, 20 YEARS, D/O LATE MUHAMMED
... Petitioner
2. JASEELA, AGED 18 YEARS, D/O LATE
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.SANJAY
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :04/09/2008
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J
------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.3378 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of September, 2008
ORDER
Petitioners are accused 3 and 4 in a prosecution for the
offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 498 A I.P.C. They
are the nieces in law, aged 22 years and 19 years, of the
complainant. Cognizance was taken and process was issued to
the petitioners.
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners,
the petitioners are young girls of marriageable age. Only
general allegations are raised against them. The allegations are
raised with oblique motive and with the transparent purpose of
vexing and harassing the husband and his relatives in an attempt
of the complainant to somehow secure settlement of the
disputes. Great hardship and prejudice would result if the
petitioners were compelled to endure the trauma of indictment
in a criminal prosecution. Powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may
be invoked and the proceedings against the petitioners, ie.
accused 3 and 4, may be quashed, it is prayed.
3. I shall carefully avoid any detailed expression of
opinion on the acceptability of the allegations or the credibility
of the data collected. Suffice it to say that I am not persuaded to
agree that there are any sufficient reasons to justify the
Crl.M.C. No.3378 of 2008 2
extraordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to
prematurely terminate the proceedings against the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners finally submits
that, at any rate, personal presence of the petitioners may not be
insisted. They may be permitted to appear through counsel, it is
prayed. I find the said request to be absolutely reasonable. I am
satisfied that while dismissing this Crl.M.C appropriate
observations to safeguard the interests of the petitioners can be
made.
5. In the result:
i) This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed;
ii) But it is directed that the learned Magistrate shall
permit the petitioners to appear through counsel. They shall be
permitted to plead discharge under Section 245(2) and/or 245(1)
Cr.P.C. Only if the learned Magistrate finds that charges are
liable to be framed against them under Section 246 Cr.P.C, need
the learned Magistrate insist on the personal presence of the
petitioners. Till then if they are represented by their counsel,
and if there is no compelling need their presence shall be
dispensed with under Section 205 Cr.P.C.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-
Crl.M.C. No.3378 of 2008 3