Partly allowed

Ramu v. a.Anusuya

Madras HC24 Sept 2019CRL OP(MD)/11067/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court partly allowed a petition to quash domestic violence proceedings. Proceedings against in-laws were quashed due to lack of direct harassment, while proceedings against the husband were dismissed with a direction to complete the trial within six months.

What did the court decide?

Quashed proceedings against petitioners-1 to 4 (in-laws) on condition of Rs. 5,000 monthly deposit by husband; dismissed petition regarding husband; trial directed to be completed within 6 months.

Ramu Vs a.Anusuya — Domestic Violence | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11067 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 24.09.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11067 of 2019 and CRL.M.P (MD) No. 6959 of 2019

¶6

Ramu

¶7

Perumal

¶8

Savithri

¶9

Parthiban

¶10

... Petitioners/Respondents

¶11

Vs.

¶12

A. Anusuya

¶13

Minor R.Sidharth ...Respondents/Petitioners

¶14

(The second respondent by his mother and natural guardian of first respondent)

¶15

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records connected with C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019, dated 22.03.2019 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thanjavur and to quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.T. Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr. Moorthy

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019, dated 22.03.2019 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thanjavur.

¶19

The first petitioner is husband and the petitioners-2 to 4 are in-laws of the respondent and the marriage between A1/Ramu and the respondent Viz., A. Anusuya was solemnized on 01.02.2017 . Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes the respondent and her husband were living separately from the matrimonial home. Under this circumstance, the respondent herein filed a petition under matrimonial case in C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019, dated 22.03.2019 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thanjavur and implicated the petitioners as parties to the petition and sought action as against them under Domestic Violence Act. The said C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019 is pending for trial. At this stage, the first petitioner husband and the petitioners-2 to 4 herein who are the in-laws of the respondent pray to quash the proceedings in C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019.

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.Perused the material documents available on record.

¶21

1/3

¶22

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11067 of 2019

¶23

4.It is seen that the relief sought for by the respondent in the domestic violence case with regard to residential rights, compensation, etc., can be made and claimed as against the first respondent/husband, who is already a party in that case. The petitioners-2 to 4 herein are only in-laws of the respondent and they are living separately. As such, the protection order sought for by the respondent herein in the domestic violence case against the petitioners-2 to 4/in-laws, based on the allegations, cannot be maintained, in view of the fact that the allegations of harassment meted out by the petitioners against the respondent itself seems to be false. While that being so, there cannot be any act of any domestic violence as defined under Domestic Violence Act against the petitioners-2 to 4. In the absence of the same, the proceedings as against the petitioners-2 to 4 cannot be maintained and consequently, the petitioners-1 to 4 need not undergo the ordeal of facing a criminal trial.

¶24

In view of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings in C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tanjavur insofar as the petitioners-2 to 4 are concerned, on condition that, they shall ensure that the A1/husband of the respondent shall deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five Thousand only) before 5^th of every English Calendar month to the credit of C.M.P. No.2020 of 2019, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tanjavur, as ad-interim maintenance, without prejudice to both the parties, failing which this order shall stand automatically cancelled. On such deposit being made, the respondent is entitled to withdraw the same.

¶25

Insofar as A1/husband of the respondent is concerned the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period of Six (6) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A1/husband of the respondent is directed to appear before the trial Court on the next hearing date, failing which, the respondent is at liberty to approach this Court.

¶26

In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is partly allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶27

Assistant Registrar (AD I)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

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

¶31

2/3

¶32

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11067 of 2019

¶33

ksa

¶34

¶35

The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thanjavur.

¶36

+1 CC to M/s.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate ( SR-89143[F] dated 25/09/2019 )

¶37

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11067 of 2019 24.09.2019

¶38

KM/(17.10.2019) 3P 3C

¶39

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

¶40

3/3

Ramu v. a.Anusuya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramu v. a.Anusuya

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

Muthumari Vs The inspector of police

Parvathi, W/o.Late. Sekar, Vs The District Collector

Pandivenkatesan Vs The Inspector of Police

Balachandar Vs The Sub inspector of police

Madhavan Vs The Inspector of Police

Anbu ramu alias ramu Vs The inspector of police