1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 10.06.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
CRL OP(MD).No. 6656 of 2019
and CRL MP(MD) No. 4476 of 2019
1. N. Pandi
2. M. Nagamalaiyan
3. N. Rajesh Kannan
4. M. Rajendran
5. Pounraj … Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Thirumangalam, Madurai District.
(Crime No.38 of 2018).
2. B. Vidhya … Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the above First
Information Report in Crime No.38 of 2018, on the file of the first
respondent police and quash the same.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
For Petitioners : Mr.C. Gangai Amaran
For Respondent-1 : Mr.R. Suyambulinga Bharathi
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
***
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash
the First Information Report in Crime No.38 of 2018.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit
that the petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crime No.
38 of 2018 for the offences under Sections 498A, Section406, Section294(b)
Section506(i) of I.P.C. He would further submit that, earlier the 2nd
respondent has given a complaint against the petitioners before
the Tirumangalam Town Police Station and a case was registered
in Crime No.265 of 2018 on 05.06.2018. Now, once again, the
second respondent has given the present complaint for the same
set of facts before the 1st respondent police and hence, the same is
not maintainable.
3. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal
Side).
http://www.judis.nic.in
3
4. On perusal of the First Information Report in Crime
No.265 of 2018, it is seen that, on 29.05.2018, the 1 st petitioner
trespassed into the house of the 2nd respondent/defacto
complainant, beated her and also abused her with filthy language.
Hence, the second respondent has given a complaint, based on the
which, a case was registered for the offence under Sections 294(b),
Section323, Section506(i) Section109 of I.P.C and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition
of Women Harassment Act, 2002 against the petitioners. But, the
present complaint has been given on the ground that the
petitioners have demanded dowry and also threatened her with
dire consequences, which was registered in Crime No.38 of 2018
for the offences under Sections 498(A), Section406, Section294(b), Section506(i) of I.P.C.
Both the complaints are filed on different cause of action, not on
the same set of facts.
5. The complaint given by the second respondent
discloses the commission of cognizable offence and hence, there is
no reason to interfere with the First Information Report and to
quash the same. Hence, no merits in the Criminal Original
Petition.
http://www.judis.nic.in
4
V. BHARATHIDASAN, J.
ksa
6. In fine, the Criminal Original Petition stands
dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
10.06.2019
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
ksa
To
1. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Thirumangalam, Madurai District.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Corut,
Madurai.
CRL OP(MD).No. 6656 of 2019
http://www.judis.nic.in
