Kerala High Court
Muhammad Humayoon vs State Of Kerala on 5 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 2182 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC NO.213 OF 2021 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II, KOLLAM
CRIME NO.2922/2020 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:
1 MUHAMMAD HUMAYOON
S/O MOHAMMED HANEEFA, RESIDING AT DARUL
FIRDOUZ, KOOTTIKKADA, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 691020.
2 SHEHZAAD,
AGED 20 YEARS,
S/O HUMAYOON, RESIDING AT DARUL FIRDOUZ,
KOOTTIKKADA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691020.
BY ADVS.
M.KIRANLAL
MANU RAMACHANDRAN
R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
SAMEER M NAIR
SAILAKSHMI MENON
SMT.AKHILA B.
JOTHISHA K.A.
AASHI K. SHAJAN
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031.
2 SHEEJA,
W/O SHAFI RESIDING AT MADEENA MANZIL,KAVITHA
MUKKU, KOOTTIKKADA, THATTAMALA.P.O, KOLLAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 691020.
2
Crl.M.C.No.2182 of 2024
R1 BY SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
R2 BY MANU GOVIND
R2 BY A.JAYASANKAR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL
HEARING ON 05.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
3
Crl.M.C.No.2182 of 2024
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2182 of 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of June, 2024
ORDER
This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code).
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in CC
No.213 of 2021 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the
First Class-II, Kollam. That is a case initiated upon a report
filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, Eravipuram Police Station
alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections
294(b), 323, 324, 341 and 354 read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The petitioners seek to quash
the said final report and further proceedings thereon.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing
for the 2nd respondent.
4. Crime No.2922 of 2022 was registered based on
the statement of the 2nd respondent. She alleged that the
petitioners out of previous enmity abused her, pulled her
down, fisted and tore off of her dress. She claimed to have
undergone treatment on account of the infirmities she
suffered thereby. After investigation, the final report was filed
alleging that the petitioners had committed the
aforementioned offences.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would
submit that on account of the delay in registering the crime
and as the prosecution material do not constitute the alleged
offences, the final report does not sustain in law and liable to
be quashed. It is further submitted that the complaint
instituted against the 2nd respondent and her husband on the
allegation that they molested and assaulted the 2 nd petitioner
is pending as C.C.No.628 of 2021 before the same court. In
retaliation of that only this case was foisted against the
petitioners. For those reasons also the petitioners canvas for
quashment of the final report and the proceedings.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor as well as the
learned counsel for the 2nd respondent oppose the pleas of the
petitioners. It is submitted that the materials on record make
out a case against the petitioners and therefore there is no
ground justifying quashment of the proceedings in CC No.213
of 2021.
7. Annexure A1 is a copy of the FIR and Annexure A2
is a copy of the Final Report and the documents appended
therewith. Annexures A3 and A4 are copies of the wound
certificates concerning the treatment of the 2 nd respondent.
On a perusal of Annexures 1 to 4, it cannot be said that no
offence would be made out. Whether the offences that would
be made out are the ones alleged in the final report is a
question to be decided by the learned Magistrate. When the
materials on record would show that the incident in which the
2nd respondent sustained bodily infirmities had occurred, the
delay in registering the crime or other inconsistencies are not
reasons sufficient to quash the proceedings. Those are
matters for consideration at trial.
8. In view of what are stated above, I am of the view
that this is not a fit case where Section 482 of the Code can
be invoked to quash the proceedings. However, the
submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the
materials would not make out all the offences mentioned in
the final report has substance. That, however, is a question to
be decided by the learned Magistrate in the light of the
provisions under Section 240 of the Code. The learned
Magistrate shall take a decision in that matter after adverting
to the entire material placed before it and after considering
the submissions of both the prosecution and the petitioners
(accused).
With the aforesaid observations this Crl.M.C. is disposed
of.
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
dxy/dkr
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.2922/2020 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE
STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT
Annexure A2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
IN CRIME NO.2922/2020 OF ERAVIPURAM
POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT DATED
15.02.2021
Annexure A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE
ISSUED IN FAVOR OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT
I.E; THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED
28.12.2020
Annexure A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE WOUND CERTIFICATE
ISSUED IN FAVOR OF THE HUSBAND OF THE
DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT DATED 27.12.2020
