Quashed

Ajith Abraham George v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC4 Jun 2024CRL OP/8832/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings arising from a complaint by a disabled tenant against a petitioner regarding a prohibition on rearing a therapy pet dog. The Court found no criminal intimidation, noted the complainant had vacated the premises, and held that a formal conveyance of the association's decision did not amount to an offence.

What did the court decide?

Complaint and proceedings quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Ajith Abraham George Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 04.06.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.6320 of 2024

¶7

Ajith Abraham George ... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

1.The State of Tamilnadu rep.by The Inspector of Police, Podhanur Police Station, Coimbatore. 2.Guruprasath ... Respondents

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the entire records in S.T.C.No.70 of 2024 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai and quash the same as against the petitioner/accused No.1.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/s.Subhang P.Nair For R1 : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R2 : No appearance

¶11

1/6

¶12

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

¶13

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

On the complaint given by one Guruprasath, who is the 2^nd respondent herein, the 1^st respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.47 of 2023 dated 24.01.2023 for the alleged offence under Section 7 r/w 92(a) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

¶16

2. The sum and substance of the complaint runs as below:-

¶17

The defacto complainant and his disabled wife are the resident of Royal Sheraton Apartment, Nanjundapuram Road, Coimbatore. They have adopted a therapy pet dog, which was assisted the disabled wife of the complainant. The Flat Owners Association has prohibited rearing pet dogs in the residential apartment and requested the defacto complainant and his wife to vacate the apartment. This has led to the registration of the complaint under the provision of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act.

¶18

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who is the 1^st accused a resident of Royal Sheraton Apartment, submitted that the respondent police has erroneously prosecuted him though he is not a member of the Executive Committee of the Flat Owners Association.

¶19

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

¶20

2/6

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶22

Furthermore, he would also submitted that when the majority members of the association had taken a concious decision to prohibit rearing pets in the residential apartment, one individual who came as a tenant in that apartment can not act against the majority members of the association. Lastly, the learned counsel also submits that the defacto complainant after lodging the complaint had vacated the premises and therefore, there cannot be any cause of action for prosecuting the petitioner under the provision of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act.

¶23

4. On considering the grounds raised in the quash petition, this

¶24

Court caused notice to the defacto complainant. The said notice was served on the respondent, but he has not chosen to participate in the proceedings either in person or through counsel.

¶25

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for

¶26

the respondent police has confirmed that the defacto complainant had vacated the apartment long back. He also submits that on completion of investigation, the respondent police has altered the charges and filed final report only for offence under Section 506(i) IPC and not under the provision of Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

¶27

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

¶28

3/6

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶30

6. On perusal of the complaint and the statement of witnesses recorded in the course of the investigation, this Court finds that there is no element of criminal intimidation to attract offence under Section 506(i) IPC. A formal conveyance of the decision of the majority members of the association cannot be termed as criminal intimidation and as far as this case is concerned, the grievance of the defacto complainant was primarily about the restriction on keeping a pet dog in the residential apartment. The defacto complainant having vacated the apartment, the entire issue has reached the finality, hence quietus to be given to the domestic aggression among the co residents. Therefore this Court quash the complaint by exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶31

7. With this observations, this Criminal Original Petition is

¶32

disposed of. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶33

04.06.2024

¶34

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶35

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

¶36

4/6

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶38

rpl To

¶39

1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai

¶40

2.The Inspector of Police, Podhanur Police Station, Coimbatore.

¶41

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

¶42

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

¶43

5/6

¶44

Crl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶45

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

¶46

rpl

¶47

C rl.O.P.No.8832 of 2024

¶48

04.06.2024

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6

Ajith Abraham George v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajith Abraham George 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

Muthuselvam Vs M.Kannappan

R.Raghu Vs State Rep

Sasi @ Jagadeesan Vs the State Rep by Its

Sakkubai Vs State Rep by

S Shanmugaraj Vs the Inspector of Police

Anthonisagayaraj Vs the State Represented by