Crl.O.P.No. 15986 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 05.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.No.15986 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.Nos.9002 & 9003 of 2022
Mohanapriya ... Petitioner
Vs
1.Shanmugam Selvarajan
2.The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C,
praying to call for the records in C.C.No.216 of 2017 on the file of the
Additional Mahila Court, Dharmapuri and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mrs.A.Subadra
For Respondents : Mr.A.Sakthivel for R1
Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor for R2
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No. 15986 of 2022
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.216 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dharmapuri, thereby taken cognizance for the offences under Sections406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.3 of 2017, as against this petitioner.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent was solemnized on 10.11.2008 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. The first respondent had given 9 ¾ sovereign of thali chain during the marriage with the petitioner. Due to trouble in family, the petitioner had filed divorce proceedings against the first respondent on the ground of cruelty and desertion in H.M.O.P.No.147 of 2014 before the Family Court, Dharmapuri. In the meantime, the petitioner had given complaint on 06.10.2013, for return of her Stridhana properties and promised to return 9 ¾ sovereign of thali chain to the first respondent after the divorce proceedings.
Page 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 15986 of 2022
3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the first respondent and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the second respondent.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to the possession of thali chain which was presented by the first respondent during their marriage. Though the petitioner had given an undertaking letter that immediately after getting divorce, she will hand over the thali chain to the first respondent. She further submitted that the first respondent lodged a complaint after a period of 1 ½ years and there is no explanation for the belated complaint. Hence, she prays to quash the same.
5.It is seen that the marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent was solemnized on 10.11.2008. Due to their wedlock, she gave birth to a male child. Thereafter, due to misunderstanding, they got separated. Based on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri, conducted an enquiry. At the time of enquiry, the Stridhana articles which was received by the first Page 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 15986 of 2022 respondent were returned to the petitioner. While acknowledging the Stridhana articles, the petitioner has undertaken to return the thali chain immediately after obtaining the divorce. It is seen that the divorce decree was obtained by the petitioner on the ground of cruelty. While pending the divorce proceedings, the first respondent lodged a complaint before the Family Court, Dharmapuri and on the direction issued by the Family Court, Dharmapuri, the First Information Report has been registered against the petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC. After completion of investigation, the second respondent has filed the final report in C.C.No.216 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dharmapuri. On perusal of the undertaking given by the petitioner dated 06.10.2013 to the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri reveals that she had given undertaking that she will return the thali chain after getting divorce decree. Therefore, the petitioner request the Inspector of Police not to take any further action on the complaint lodged against her. There are materials available on the complaint registered against the petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC.
Page 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 15986 of 2022
6.In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.216 of 2017 in Crime No.3 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dharmapuri. The petitioner is at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the personal appearance of the petitioner is dispensed with and she shall be represented by a counsel after filing appropriate application. However, the petitioner shall be present before the Court at the time of furnishing of copies, framing charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and at the time of passing judgment. The trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.
7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
05.09.2022 Index:Yes/no Speaking/non speaking order vkr Page 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 15986 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, vkr To
1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.
2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
Crl.O.P.No.15986 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.Nos.9002 & 9003 of 2022 05.09.2022 Page 6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis