Dismissed

Nareshkumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC12 Apr 2023CRL OP/5360/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Madras High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings. The Court held that the trial had advanced to a stage where defense witnesses were about to be examined, making it inappropriate to quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The criminal original petition was dismissed. Personal appearance of petitioners at the lower court was dispensed with.

Nareshkumar Vs State Rep by — Dowry and Cruelty | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.5360 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.04.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.5360 of 2021 and

¶7

Crl.M.P.No.3477 of 2021

¶8

1.Naresh Kumar 2.Eswari

¶9

...Petitioners / 3^rd and 4^th Accused

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

1.State represented by: Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tindivanam, Villupuram District. (Crime No.10 of 2020)

¶12

... 1^st Respondent / Complainant

¶13

2.Kavitha ... 2^nd Respondent / De-facto Complainant

¶14

Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No.124 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court – I, Tindivanam, Villupuram.

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.K.C.Senthil Kumar For R1 : Mr.S.Balaji, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : No Appearance

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

1/5

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.5360 of 2021

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.124 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate – I, Tindivanam, Villupuram District, filed for the offence under Sections 294(b), 354, 406, 420, 498(A), 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.

¶21

2.The allegation is that the petitioners are brother and sister-in-law of the 1^st accused, who is the husband of the 2^nd respondent / defacto complainant; that they had harassed the defacto complainant and demanded dowry, besides abusing her in filthy language. Hence, the complaint.

¶22

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1^st petitioner herein is the brother of the 1^st Accused. The 1^st petitioner and his wife namely, the 2^nd petitioner are living separately and have nothing to do with the marriage between the 1^st accused and the 2^nd respondent.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

2/5

¶25

Crl.O.P.No.5360 of 2021

¶26

4.The learned Government Advocate, submitted that the witnesses

¶27

have been examined and the case is now posted for the examination of the defence witness.

¶28

5.Though there is force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners, that the petitioners have nothing to do with the marriage between the 1^st accused and the 2^nd respondent, in view of the advance stage of the trial, this Court is not inclined to entertain the quash petition. According, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Connected Crl.M.P.No.3477 of 2021 is closed.

¶29

6.The personal appearance of the petitioners in C.C.No.124 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate – I, Tindivanam, Villupuram District, are dispensed with, unless the learned Judicial Magistrate – I, Tindivanam, considers their appearance necessary for the progress of the trial.

¶30

12.04.2023

¶31

smv Index : Yes/No Speaking : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

3/5

¶34

Crl.O.P.No.5360 of 2021

¶35

To,