ABDULLAH Vs. HAJIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'Cr.P.C.') at the instance of the petitioner, who is accused in L.P. No. 60/2012 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram, which is a case instituted upon the police report in Crime No. 279/2010 of Valayam Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections. 498A, 406, 354 and 511 of 376 r/w 34 of I.P.C. with a prayer to quash Annexure I final report and all further proceedings in L.P. No. 60/2012 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram in Crime No. 279/2010 of Valayam Police Station as the matter is settled out of court.

(2.) THE allegation in the above case is that on 23.03.2008, the first accused Abdulla married de facto complainant as per religious rites and they were living as husband and wife. While so A1 to A4 at their residence XV/360 of Vanimel Panchayath, mentally and physically ill treated the de facto complainant stating that the gold ornaments given to the de facto complainant at the time of marriage was so less and by demanding more gold and money and also by stating that the first accused would have received the better alliance. The second accused at many occasions caught hold the body of the de facto complainant and ill treated her and on 20.01.2009 night while the de facto complainant and second accused alone were therein the house the second accused caught hold of the de facto complainant and attempted to commit sexual inter course. 46 = sovereigns of gold ornaments were given to the de facto complainant at the time of marriage by the family members except 6 sovereigns chain and 2 bangles each of 1 sovereign and 1 stud having 1 sovereign all other gold ornaments were obtained by accused No. 2, 3 and 4 in the guise of keeping that and when the de facto complainant had demanded back that, that has not been returned and they have committed breach of trust and thereby the accused has committed that aforesaid offences, and now, the case of the petitioner is that the matter is settled out of court.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the above case, the matter is settled amicably between the parties to the dispute which is the subject matter of the above case. Therefore, the continuation of the proceedings in the above case is abuse of process of law and proceedings.