IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1663 of 2011() ------------------------------------- CC.141/2011 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SAJIDA, D/O. MOIDEENKUNHI, AGED 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT GUNAJE HOUSE, P.O. ARIYAPPADI, PERDALA VIA, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT ALMAS MANZIL, MUTTAMBANGERA, UPPALA, MANGALPADY VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. AYSHATH RAJEENA, D/O. MOHAMMAD, AGED 24 YEARS, RESIDING AT AL-AMEEN HOUSE, MANGALPADY, MANGALPADY VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN- 671 324. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.B. VINOD. R2 BY ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs Crl.MC.No. 1663 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE PRIVATE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT IN C.C.NO.141/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KASARAGOD. ANNEXURE A2: COPY OF THE SUMMONS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER IN C.C.141/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KASARAGOD. RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs B.P. RAY, J. ........................................... CRL.M.C.NO.1663 OF 2011 ............................................. Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011. O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has been implicated in a case under Section 494 read with Section 34 IPC in C.C.No.141/2011 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kasaragod alleging physical and mental torture by demanding dowry against the petitioner and other accused person. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that both the petitioner and respondent No.2 belong to Muslim community. He also states that under Mohammadan's law second marriage is not prohibited during subsistence of the first marriage. The learned counsel has brought to the attention of this Court a decision reported in Abdulla v. Noorjahan (1987 KHC 255) wherein it is stated that second marriage by Muslim husband during subsistence of first marriage is not an offence under Section 494 since it is permitted by personal law. 4. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/defacto CRL.M.C.NO.1663 OF 2011 : 2 : complainant fairly submits that a case under Section 494 IPC is not made against the petitioner. 5. In view of the above submission, in my considered view continuance of this case will be an abuse of process of this Court. Accordingly, I direct that the case pending against the petitioner in C.C.No.141/2011 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Kasaragod shall be treated to be closed. Accordingly, this Crl.M.C is disposed of as above. Sd/= B.P. RAY, JUDGE. /true copy/ P.S. to Judge cl