Allowed

Mahenderan v. Gomathi

Madras HC17 Nov 2017CRL OP(MD)/12893/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashed a criminal complaint filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the Domestic Violence Act against the petitioner, as no specific allegations were made against him. The court directed the lower court to decide the merits against other implicates within six months.

What did the court decide?

The criminal complaint was quashed insofar as the petitioner was concerned, and was allowed.

Mahenderan Vs Gomathi — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 17.11.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12893 of 2011

¶7

Mahenderan ... Petitioner/Respondent No.4

¶8

Vs .

¶9

Gomathi ... Respondent/Petitioner

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of the complaint in S.T.C.No.1502 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy and quash the same against the petitioner.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.T.A.Omprakash For Respondent : Ms.K.Mahalakshmi for Mr.R.P.Ramachanthiran

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the S.T.C.No.1502 of 2009, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy.

¶14

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is none other than the brother-in-law's wife. Due to family dispute, the brother-in-law's wife filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., before the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.V, Trichy., under the Domestic Violation Act, implicating the petitioner's wife, petitioner's brother-in-law, petitioner's motherin-law and petitioner's father-in-law. However, he filed a present petition, on the ground that no specific allegation was made against him in the entire complaint.

¶15

3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent fairly conceded that on perusal of the entire complaint, no specific allegation was made against the present petitioner and she has no objection to quash the complaint in sofaras the petitioner is concerned.

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

4.In view of the above said submission, without going into

¶18

¶19

the merits of the case, the complaint is quashed in sofaras the petitioner is concerned. This Court has not expressed any opinion in the merits of the case. Independently, the lower Court has to decide the issue in respect of the other petitioner within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This criminal original petition is allowed.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

¶22

/True Copy/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Trichy.

¶26

1 CC TO Mr.T.SENTHIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 87839 + 1 CC TO Mr.R.P.RAMACHANTHIRAN, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 87995

¶27

RMI

¶28

TE/MR-KKR/SAR-2 : 11/12/2017 : 2P/4C

¶29

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12893 of 2011 17.11.2017

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mahenderan v. Gomathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahenderan v. Gomathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.a.Muruganji, Vs the Inspector of Police

Manuel, Vs the Inspector of Police

Parvathi @ Sudha, Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohana Vs Nithya

Mercury Agency Vs Selvaraj

Nallu Vs the Inspector of Police