Allowed

Aravinthan v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC25 Apr 2022CRL OP(MD)/20505/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench quashed criminal proceedings under Special Criminal Complaint No. 108 of 2020. The court found that the petitioner had married the victim, who is four months pregnant, and they live together, rendering further prosecution pointless and destructive to their lives.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the proceedings in Special S.C.No.108 of 2020 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai.

Aravinthan Vs The Inspector of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD)No.20505 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON: 04.02.2022 PRONOUNCED ON: 25.04.2022 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.O.P(MD)No.20505 of 2021

¶4

Aravinthan ... Petitioner / Accused

¶5

Vs 1.State represented by the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thallakulam, Madurai District. In Crime No.21/2020 ... 1^st Respondent / Complainant 2.Balasubramanian ...2^nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant 3.xxxx ...3^rd Respondent /Victim Girl

¶6

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the proceedings in Spl.S.C.No.108 of 2020 on the file of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Pandiyaraj For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthikumar Government Advocate For R2 & R3 : Mr.S.Prasanth

¶8

ORDER

¶9

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Special S.C.No.108 of 2020 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai.

¶10

I had an interaction with the parties. The petitioner confirmed that he has already married the victim who had also attained majority. However, registration will be done later. The victim is also presently four months pregnant. The victim's father states that the petitioner and the victim are living under one roof. The victim has also made it clear that she is not going to support the prosecution.

¶11

In these circumstances, the continuation of the impugned prosecution is not going to serve any purpose. Since the victim is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

1/2

¶13

Crl.O.P(MD)No.20505 of 2021

¶14

four months pregnant and the accused also states that he has already married her, if the prosecution continues and is taken to its logical conclusion, the lives of both will be ruined. Therefore, the impugned proceedings stand quashed. This Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

¶15

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶16

rmi

¶17

Enclose copy of Joint Compromise memo.

¶18

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶19

¶20

1.The District and Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Madurai.

¶21

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thallakulam, Madurai District.

¶22

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶23

+1 CC to M/s.S. PANDIYARAJ, Advocate ( SR-21263[F] dated 26/04/2022 )

¶24

Crl.O.P(MD)No.20505 of 2021 25.04.2022

¶25

RK(25/05/2022) 2P 5C

¶26

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

¶27

2/2

Aravinthan v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aravinthan 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

Sri Gunaseelan Vs Smt.Thonthi Ammal

Nanthagopal Vs S.v.Sakthivel (Died)

Pitchai Vs Thirumalaikolunthu

Arun Vs The Inspector of Police

Vijayaraj Vs Tamil Nadu Government

Rathinathammal (Died) Vs Sekar