SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Bharisha Begam vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 26 April, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021


DATED: 26.04.2021



Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021
and Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos.1089 1090 of 2021

Bharisha Begam .. Petitioner


1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep. by The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
(Crime No.33 of 2014)

2.Nadhira Banu .. Respondents

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal

Procedure Code, to call for the final report in C.C.No.436 of 2014 on the

file of the learned Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul and quash the same as

against this petitioner as illegal and devoid of merits.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jagadeesh Pandian

For Respondents : Mr.R.Srinivasan
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021


(This writ petition is heard through video conference)

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking to quash the

final report filed in C.C.No.436 of 2014, on the file of the learned

Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul.

2.On the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent

herein the cases in Crime No.33 of 2014 for the offences punishable under

Sections 417, 420, 498A 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Prevention of

Women from Harassment Act, was registered by the first respondent, which

was later altered into 417, 420, 498A, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of

Women Harassment Act and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on


3.The case of the second respondent is that the marriage was

performed on 16.01.2011 between herself and the first accused and at the

time of the marriage, she was given 3 sovereigns of gold jewels and dowry

of Rs.20,000/-. After the marriage, the accused person ill-treated her and on

20.06.2011, demanded dowry amount of Rs.50,000/- and she was forcibly

evicted from the matrimonial house. She got a child on 25.09.2011. On the

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021

basis of the complaint given by the second respondent, the above case was

registered and after conducting the investigation, a final report was filed

before the concerned jurisdictional Court, which was also taken on file in

C.C.No.436 of 2014 and committed to the Additional Mahila Court,

Dindigul and is now pending. Now Seeking quashment of the final report,

the petitioner, who is the fourth accused before the trial Court has filed this

criminal original petition on the ground that the marriage between the

petitioner and the first accused took place in the year 2011. She was not

aware of the marriage between the defacto complainant and accused No.1.

She is the first wife of the first accused. There was some misunderstanding

between them. The alleged occurrence took place in the year 2011. The

complaint has been lodged in the year 2014. So she is no way connected

with the alleged occurrence.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner

is the fourth accused in the final report. The first accused is the husband of

the fourth accused. It is the further contention that only after one year from

the date of marriage the alleged occurrence said to have taken place and

being a lady her personal appearance may be dispensed with before the trial

Court and considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021

the petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, the personal

appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court is dispensed with on

condition that the petitioner must appear before the trial Court within a

period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and

filing an undertaking affidavit that she will appear as and when required by

the learned Magistrate by affixing an attested photo.

5.With this directions, this petition is disposed of. Consequently,

connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No


Note: In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the
order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented is the correct
copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.


1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul.

2.The Judge, Additional Mahila Court, Dindiugul.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021

3.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station, Dindigul.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021



Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2203 of 2021



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation