Allowed

Madhavan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Sept 2019CRL OP(MD)/11893/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR alleging kidnapping, trespass, and abduction. The Court found that the victim voluntarily met the accused, married him, and confirmed her marriage to the Court, rendering the FIR an abuse of the process of law. Consequently, the proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of the FIR in Crime No.77 of 2019 quashed; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Madhavan Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11893 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 24.09.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11893 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.(MD) No. 7472 of 2019

¶7

Madhavan

¶8

P. Vijay 3. G. Asai Thambi 4. C. Muthaiya

¶9

... Petitioners/A1 to A4

¶10

¶11

1.State through The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.77 of 2019)

¶12

2.Vijayalakshmi

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying to call for the entire records in connection with FIR in Crime No.77 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.Seeni Sulthan

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.K.Suyambulinga bharathi, G.A. (Crl. Side) for R1

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.77 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent police as against the petitioners.

¶19

The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that on a complaint lodged by the second respondent the first respondent has initially registered a case in Crime No.77 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 448, 294(b), 506(ii) and 366 of IPC and 4 of TNPHW Act. He further submitted that the third petitioner herein fall in love with the daughter of the second respondent herein who is aged about 21 years and thereafter they got married

¶20

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

¶21

1/4

¶22

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11893 of 2019

¶23

and now they are living together happily. Unfortunately, the third petitioner belongs to other community and as such it was objected by the second respondent and a false complaint has been foisted that the petitioners trespassed into her house and kidnapped the victim on knife point when it was questioned by her abused her with filthy language and also threatened with dire consequences. He further submitted that both are belongs to different community and the third petitioner belongs to SC community. Infact, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and she categorically stated that she was never kidnapped by anybody and on 13.05.2019 she only went to Mattu Thavani bus stand and thereafter she got married with the third petitioner herein on 17.05.2019. The marriage took place only with consent of the victim girl. Therefore, further proceedings of the FIR would caused great prejudice to the petitioner as well as the victim. Therefore, they sought for quashment of FIR.

¶24

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that based on a complaint lodged by the second respondent a case has been registered in Crime No. 77 of 2019 and subsequently altered the offences. He would further submit that based on a complaint the victim was enquired and recorded her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. It revealed that the victim girl on her own went along with the third petitioner and also got married on 17.05.2019. Now they are living together happily and the investigation is still pending.

¶25

The statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C of the victim is extracted hereunder:

¶26

“vdJ nrhe;j Ch; tlkiyf;Fwpr;rp MFk;. ehDk; vdJ jk;gpAk; vdJ mk;khTld; Nkw;gb tPl;by; FbapUe;J tUfpNwhk;. vdJ mg;gh jpUts;Shpy; jdpahh; epWtdj;jpy; gzpGhpe;J tUfpwhh;. vdf;Fk; vdJ fzth; Mirjk;gpf;Fk; fle;j 7 tUlkhf gof;fk; cs;sJ. fle;j 13.05.19 md;W fhiy ehdhf tPl;il tpl;L g]; Vwp kJiuf;F vdJ fzth; ,Ue;j khl;Lj;jhtzpf;F nrd;Nwd;. vdJ fztUk; md;iwa jpdk; kJiuapy; jhd; ,Ue;jhh;. NtW ahUk; vd;id flj;jp nry;ytpy;iy. NkYk; Nkw;gb jpdj;jpy; vq;fSila tPl;bw;F NtW ahUk; tutpy;iy. vdf;Fk; vdJ fztUf;Fk; 17.05.2019 md;W xU Nfhtpypy; itj;J jpUkzk; ele;jJ. Nkw;gb jpUkzk; vdJ KO rk;kjj;Jld; jhd; ele;jJ.”

¶27

The second respondent/defacto complainant is also present before this Court by person.

¶28

Heard Mr.Seeni Sulthan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for appearing for the respondent police

¶29

7. Based on a complaint lodged by the second respondent a case has been registered in Crime No.77 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 448, 294(b), 506(ii) and 366 of IPC and 4 of TNPHW Act as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ against the petitioners. The crux of the complaint is that her

¶30

2/4

¶31

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11893 of 2019

¶32

daughter by name Shruthi aged about 21 years is studying IIIrd year B.A. (Arts) on V.V.V. College, Virudhunagar. While she was studying 10 th standard the third petitioner herein always disturbed her and compelled her to love him. Therefore, on 13.05.2019 when the second respondent and the victim girl were in their house, the four known persons and trespassed into their house on knife point the victim girl was kidnapped.

¶33

8. Today, the victim girl as well as the second respondent are present before this Court. In the interest of justice, this Court enquired the victim girl and she stated that she has completed her decree and she is working as Teacher in the Primary School and she fall in love with the third petitioner herein and as such to marry him on 13.05.2019 she herself went to Mattuthavani Bus stand to meet the third petitioner herein. Thereafter, on 17.05.2019 both got married and are living together in the house of the third petitioner herein. She further stated that no one kidnapped as alleged by the second respondent and no occurrence was happened on 13.05.2019 as complaint lodged by the second respondent.

¶34

9. This Court also enquired the second respondent namely, mother of the victim stated that on the date of occurrence i.e., on 13.05.2019 all the accused persons have trespassed into her house and kidnapped the victim girl on knife point. She also stated that the victim fall in love with the third petitioner and now they got married and she is living with the third petitioner herein. Further, she wants to take appropriate action as against the accused persons for trespassing into her house and kidnapped the victim girl.

¶35

10. According to the prosecution, they initially registered a case in Crime No.77 of 2019 for the offences under Section 448, 294 (b), 506(ii) and 366 of I.P.C and subsequently, altered into the offences under sections 294(b), 366, 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of TNPHW Act. Further, the victim girl herself stated before this Court as well as before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhunagar she was not at all kidnapped by anybody and she herself on her own went to meet the third petitioner herein due to love affair. On 17.05.2019 they also got married and are living together and this was confirmed by the second respondent/defacto complainant. Therefore, further proceedings of the FIR would caused serious prejudice to the petitioners as well as the victim. Infact, the victim girl does not want to go to her parent's house and she requested this Court to direct the second respondent to hand over all the educational certificates to the victim. Therefore, the pendency of the impugned FIR would not serve any purpose and it is clear abuse of process of law.

¶36

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

¶37

3/4

¶38

CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11893 of 2019

¶39

11. In view of the above discussions, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the proceedings of the FIR in Crime No.77 of 2019 is quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶40

Sd/Assistant Registrar (P&A) // True Copy //

¶41

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶42

ksa

¶43

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhunagar. 2. The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station, Virudhunagar District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶44

+2 CC to M/s.S.SEENI SULTHAN, Advocate SR-88950.

¶45

Order made in CRL.O.P (MD) No. 11893 of 2019 24.09.2019

¶46

CS(11.11.2019) 4P 6C

¶47

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

¶48

4/4

Madhavan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhavan v. The Inspector of Police

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

Ramu Vs a.Anusuya

Anbu ramu alias ramu Vs The inspector of police