Dismissed

Mithun v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC22 Dec 2021CRL OP/32339/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras dismissed a petition to quash criminal proceedings alleging threats and assault arising from a pending divorce dispute, citing significant prima facie materials and the need for detailed investigation.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition to quash the charge sheet was dismissed. Directions were issued to the District Munsif to dispose of the case within six months.

Mithun Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.12.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.32339 OF 2019 AND

¶6

CRL.M.P.NOS.17806 AND 17807 OF 2019

¶7

Mithun

¶8

Barath

¶9

Amika

¶10

Hema Priyadarshini ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 4

¶11

/versus/

¶12

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Gummudipoondi Police Station, Thiruvallur Taluk and District.

¶13

... 1^st Respondent/Complainant

¶14

Rajeshwari

¶15

... 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶16

PRAYER:-

¶17

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet filed in C.C.No.519 of 2019 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Gummudipoondi in Crime No.214 of 2019 on the file of the Gummudipoondi Police Station and quash the same.

¶18

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Selvakumar

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor For R1

¶20

No appearance for R2

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet filed in C.C.No.519 of 2019 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Gummudipoondi in Crime No.214 of 2019 on the file of the Gummudipoondi Police Station and quash the same.

¶24

Brief facts of the case are that, the second petitioner is the husband of the second respondent/de-facto complainant. The first, third and fourth petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant. A marriage was solemnized between the second petitioner and the de-facto complainant as per the Hindu Rites and Customs on 17.02.2016. Due to family dispute, the second petitioner filed H.M.O.P.No.169 of 2018 before the Sub Court, Ponneri against the de-facto complainant for divorce, due to which, the petitioners came to the de-facto complainant's house and threatened her with dire consequences to sign the divorce petition pending before the Sub Court, Ponneri in H.M.O.P.No.169 of 2018.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the investigation was not properly conducted and the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners only based on the complainant's statement, without recording any third party evidence and there is no independent witness. The trial Court, after taking cognizance of offence, has taken the case in C.C.No.519 of 2019 on file. But, on the face of the records, it reveals that, a case in H.M.O.P.No.169 of 2018 has been filed by the husband against the de-facto complainant/wife before the Sub Court, Ponneri, due to matrimonial dispute. After filing the original petition, she gave a complaint against the petitioners to harass the petitioners, who are the family members of the second petitioner/husband. Hence, this petition has been filed to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners.

¶26

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent submitted that, based on the complaint, First Information Report was registered and investigation was conducted. After investigation, final report was filed before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Gummidipoondi. Based on the final report, the trial Court, has taken cognizance of offences and case in C.C.No.519 of 2019 was taken on file. Therefore, there is no need to quash the criminal proceedings at this stage.

¶27

Even though notice was served on the second respondent, there is no representation on behalf of the second respondent.

¶28

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

¶29

Admittedly, a divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No.169 of 2018 was filed by the second petitioner/husband before the Sub Court, Ponneri against the de facto complainant for divorce and the same is pending. After filing the divorce petition, the complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant and a case was registered against the petitioners. After completion of investigation, the investigation agency has found some prima facie materials against the petitioners and filed the final report and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.519 of 2019. The allegations levelled against the petitioners is that the petitioners abused, assaulted and also threatened the de facto complainant with dire consequences to sign the divorce petition, which needs a detailed investigation. So the aggrieved parties have to work out their remedy only before the trial Court by making all the defence available with them.

¶30

Hence, I do not find any irregularity in filing the charge sheet. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

¶31

However, it is made clear that, since the case is of the year 2019, the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Gummidipoondi, is directed to dispose of the case in C.C.No.519 of 2019 within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶34

//True Copy//

¶35

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶36

ari

¶37

¶38

The Subordinate Judge, Ponneri.

¶39

The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Gummudipoondi.

¶40

The Sub Inspector of Police, Gummudipoondi Police Station, Thiruvallur Taluk and District.

¶41

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

¶42

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶43

+1cc to Mr.R.Selvakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.69301

¶44

CRL.O.P.NO.32339 OF 2019

¶45

AK-II(CO) PBS/21/01/2022

¶46

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

Mithun v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithun v. the State of Tamil Nadu

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

Punitha Selvam Vs the State Rep. by

Asha Vs State Represent by

Kavi @ Kavinkumar Vs State Rep by Its

A.Valliyammal Vs State Represented by

V.Narasimhan Vs the State Rep by

Kumar Vs State by