Allowed

Rajendran v. Tmt.Jaya

Madras HC20 Feb 2020CRL OP/26735/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras quashed criminal proceedings against petitioners in a private complaint alleging offences under the IPC and TN Women Harassment Act. Finding no specific allegations or material evidence against the petitioners, the Court held the continuation of proceedings against them was an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No.44 of 2014 quashed insofar as petitioners are concerned.

Rajendran Vs Tmt.Jaya — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 20.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.26735 of 2014 and Crl.M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶6

1.Rajendran 2.Maragatham 3.Arun 4.Vinodh 5.Dhamayanthi 6.Bharathidasan ...Petitioners/Accused 3 to 8 Versus Jaya ... Respondent/Complainant

¶7

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.44 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram and quash the same as illegal sofar as the petitioners are concerned.

¶8

For Petitioners : M/s.R.Sankarasubbu For Respondent : M/s.R.Rajamani ORDER

¶9

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.44 of 2014 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Chidambaram.

¶10

2.The respondent filed a private complaint before the Court below against the petitioners and other accused for the offences under Sections 417, 420, 498(A), 494 of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act.

¶11

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners have been roped in this case based on some vague allegations made against them. The learned counsel would further submit that the criminal proceedings as against the petitioners is an abuse of process of Court and the same requires interference of this Court and the petitioners have been roped

¶12

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

¶13

in this case on the ground that they are the relatives of the 1^st accused, who is the husband of the respondent. He would further submit that there is no evidence to prove the petitioners were facilitated the second marriage of the 1^st accused with 2^nd accused.

¶14

4.The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the witnesses have spoken about the part played by the accused persons and there are materials to frame charges against the accused persons and the petitioners will have to establish their defence only before the Court below in the course of trial and there is no ground to interfere with the proceedings at this stage.

¶15

5.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also the materials available on record.

¶16

6.A careful reading of the complaint shows that there is no allegation made against the petitioners. Except for some vague allegations made against the petitioners, there are absolutely no materials to show that the petitioners had in any way acted with cruelty against the respondent and the petitioners unnecessarily roped in as accused and are made to face a criminal prosecution. The proceedings as against petitioners is an abuse of process of Court and the same requires interference of this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶17

7.In the result, the proceedings in C.C.No.44 of 2014, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram is hereby quashed insofar the petitioners are concerned. Accordingly this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶18

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar vv2

¶21

¶22

The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram.

¶23

Crl.O.P.No.26735 of 2014

¶24

AK(CO) RN(19/05/2020)

¶25

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

Rajendran v. Tmt.Jaya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendran v. Tmt.Jaya

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

N. Ashokkumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Saratha Vs Shoba

Sundari Vs State of Tamil Nadu

M.S.Raja Vs State Rep by

B.Murugan Vs State Rep.by

Poonsolai Vs Vadivelu