CHEMBILALI NOORUDIN Vs. ULIKUNNAL KADEEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH cases were filed by the same person (one Noordhin) under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The only respondent in Crl. M. C. 245 of 1984 is one Kadeeja. In Crl. M. C. 901 of 1984 respondents are Kadeeja and her minor son Kunhi Mayan aged 3. I will be referring to them hereinafter as petitioner and respondents, where - ever necessary or by their names.

(2.) KADEEJA was divorced by her husband. Her case is that there - after intimacy started between her and Noordhin which developed into free sex on the assurance of Noordhin that he will marry her. Kunhi Mayan was born out of that relationship. It is also her case that on the assurance that a new gold chain will be purchased and given to her, Noordhin got her gold chain, but misappropriated the same and cheated her. She filed a criminal complaint against him before the Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate 1, Tellicherry on 26 -12 -1983 for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code. After an enquiry under Section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Code the Magistrate took the complaint to file as C. C. 10 of 1984 and a copy of it is filed as Annexure -A. She filed an earlier complaint against him on the same cause of action on 20 -12 -1983 as Crl. M. P. 2576 of 1983. After recording the sworn statement of Kadeeja the complaint was dismissed under Section 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code and copy of the order is Annexure B. Annexure B was not mentioned in Annexure A.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner is that Annexure A is an abuse of the process of court and Crl. M. C. 245 of 1984 was filed to quash the same.