[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Shemeer vs State Of Kerala on 4 February, 2026
2026:KER:9626
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.GIRISH
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 15TH MAGHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO.4535 OF 2020
CRIME NO.124/2020 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM
IN C.C.NO.331 OF 2020 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE
COURT, NILAMBUR
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:
1 SHEMEER
AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. ADUL RAHIM,
RESIDING @ THUNDIL VEEDU, KANNANALLOOR,
KOLLAM 691 586.
2 ARIFA
AGED 58 YEARS, W/O. ADBUL RAHIM,
RESIDING @ THUNDIL VEEDU, KANNANALLOOR,
KOLLAM 691 586.
3 SAJEENA,
AGED 30 YEARS, W/O. SHAHAL
RESIDING @ THUNDIL VEEDU, KANNANALLOOR,
KOLLAM 691 586.
4 REEJA,
AGED 28 YEARS, D/O. ABDUL RAHIM
RESIDING @ THUNDIL VEEDU, KANNANALLOOR,
KOLLAM 691 586.
BY ADV.
SRI.R.KISHORE (KALLUMTHAZHAM)
2026:KER:9626
Crl.M.C.No.4535 of 2020
-2-
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.
2 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
MALAPPURAM 676 509.
3 STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
NILAMBUR POLICE STATION, NILAMBUR,
MALAPPURAM 679 330.
4 MUHASINA RASHEED,
AGED 25 YEARS, D/O. RASHEED
RESIDING AT @ VILAKKATHIL HOUSE, C H COLONY,
CHANDAKUNNU, NILAMBUR, MALAPPURAM 679 342.
BY ADVS.
SRI.GEORGE MATHEW
SRI.PRAVEEN S.
SRI.RENJIT GEORGE, SR.PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:9626
Crl.M.C.No.4535 of 2020
-3-
G. GIRISH, J.
----------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.4535 of 2020
------------------------------------
Dated this the 4th day of February, 2026
ORDER
Petitioners 1, 3 and 4 are accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.331 of
2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,
Nilambur. The offence alleged against them is under Section 498A
IPC read with Section 34 IPC.
2. The 1st petitioner / 1st accused is the husband of the
defacto complainant / 4th respondent. The 2nd petitioner was the
mother of the 1st accused, and the other petitioners are his sisters.
Presently, the 2nd petitioner is reported to be no more. The
prosecution case is that, ever since the marriage of the 1st petitioner
with the 4th respondent on 01.07.2017, she was being subjected to
mental cruelty by the petitioners. It is alleged that the gold
ornaments belonging to the defacto complainant were taken away
and misappropriated by the petitioners. Thus, the petitioners are
alleged to have committed the aforesaid offence.
2026:KER:9626
3. In the present petition, the petitioners would contend
that they are totally innocent, and that they have been falsely
implicated in this case. It is further submitted that none of the
offences alleged against the petitioners are attracted in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned counsel for the 4th respondent and the learned Public
Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.
5. On going through the allegations levelled by the 4th
respondent in her First Information Statement, as well as the other
statements given to the Investigating Officer, it is seen that the
accusations against petitioners 3 and 4 are so flimsy that it could not
be taken as mental cruelty to attract the offence under Section 498A
IPC. Such petty tussles and issues arising in a family are not
sufficient to constitute mental cruelty as far as the relatives of the
husband are concerned. However, the allegation of the defacto
complainant that the 1st petitioner had even denied the paternity of
the child born in his wedlock with the defacto complainant would go
2026:KER:9626
to show that he had inflicted severe mental cruelty upon that lady,
which was enough to drive her to commit suicide. That being so, the
offence under Section 498A IPC is clearly brought out as against the
1st petitioner / 1st accused. So also, the allegations of the defacto
complainant about the misappropriation of her gold ornaments by
the 1st petitioner / 1st accused, is a matter to be enquired into. In a
proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it is not possible for this Court
to evaluate the evidence on record and to arrive at a finding on the
truth or falsity of the contentions of the defacto complainant about
the misappropriation of her gold ornaments by the 1st petitioner.
Therefore, I am of the view that the criminal prosecution launched in
this case would lie only against the 1st accused / 1st petitioner, and
that the other petitioners / accused are liable to be exonerated.
In the result, the petition stands allowed in part as follows :-
(i) The proceedings against petitioners 3 and 4
(accused Nos.2 and 3) in C.C.No.331 of 2020 on the files of
the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nilambur, which arose
2026:KER:9626
out of Crime No.124 of 2020 of the Nilambur Police Station,
are hereby quashed.
(ii) It is made clear that there is absolutely no legal
impediment for the learned Magistrate to proceed with the trial
against the 1st accused in that case.
Sd/-
G. GIRISH
JUDGE
ded/04.02.2026
2026:KER:9626
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 4535 OF 2020
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NUMBERED AS
0124/2020 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION DATED
03.03.2020.
ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C.
NUMBERED AS 331/2020 PENDING BEFORE THE JFMC
NILAMBUR.
ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY
THE DEFCTO COMPLAINTS FATHER AND THE 1ST
ACCUSED DATED 30TH OCTOBER 2017.
ANNEXURE A4 THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PETITIONERS
PASSPORT NUMBERED AS 4891382.
ANNEXURE A5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PETITIONERS FATHERS
DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 25.02.2020.
