The High Court quashed the private complaint proceedings against the petitioner alone. It held that continuing the prosecution in a matrimonial dispute constituted an abuse of process of law, as the allegations of intimidation were not found to cause danger to life.
The private complaint S.T.C.No.1538 of 2017 was quashed against the petitioner alone.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 13.06.2022
C O R A M
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
Crl.O.P. No.8520 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.4951 of 2022
S.Alamelu
...Petitioner
Versus
C.G.Sri Priya ...Respondent
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records in S.T.C.No.1538 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore Quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramachandran For Respondent : Mr.S.Saravanan
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.No.1538 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it is the case of matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife. The petitioner herein is arrayed as A4 in the private complaint and she is the sister in law of the defacto complainant. The case was taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 506 (i) of IPC. He would further submit that it is the mere bald statements of alleged threat would not attract the offence under Section 506(i) of IPC. The allegation found against the petitioner in this case is abuse of process of law. Hence, he prays to quash the complaint.
complaint against the present petitioner is that the petitioner and her family members went to the defacto complainant's home and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the defacto complainant has lodged a private complaint for the offences under Section 120 A, 339, 383, 420, 423, 442, 468, 500 r/w 34 of IPC on 15.09.2016 whereas, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance only for the offence under Section 506 (i) of IPC. The above act of the accused affected the complainant's personal life as well as her business. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this Petition.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
JPL[co] NSK/23/06/2022
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the continuing criminal prosecution against the petitioner in a matrimonial dispute amounts to an abuse of process of law.
Whether the allegations against the petitioner constitute the offence of criminal intimidation under Section 506(i) of IPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S. Alamelu
C. G. Sri Priya
N. Sathish Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
