Madras High Court
S.Kamal Chand vs Sushmitha @ Payalkumari on 24 August, 2021
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.3984 & 3985 of 2019
1. S.Kamal Chand
2. Saroja Bai
3. D.Senekraj Chordia
4. S.Gokulkumar
5. Prathiba .. Petitioners
Vs.
Sushmitha @ Payalkumari .. Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order dated 07.02.2019 made in
CRP.No.34 of 2016 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge,
Cuddalore confirming the order dated 30.08.2016 made in Crl.M.P.No.1493
of 2015 in C.C.No.97 of 2014 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum
Judicial Magistrate, Parangipettai.
For Petitioners : Mr.N.Manokaran
For Respondent : Mr.B.Jawahar
1
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
ORDER
The petitioners have filed this petition seeking to set aside the
order dated 07.02.2019 made in CRP.No.34 of 2016 on the file of the
learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore confirming the order dated
30.08.2016 made in Crl.M.P.No.1493 of 2015 in C.C.No.97 of 2014 on the
file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Parangipettai.
2. The case of the petitioners is that the 1st petitioner and the
respondent got married on 23.04.2014 and they were blessed with two sons.
First son, viz., Ajay Veevyn was born on 31.05.2005 and second son, viz,
Vijay Veevyn was born on 30.12.2009. However, right from the inception,
the respondent has disliked the company of the 1st petitioner for no
justifiable cause and the 1st petitioner has tolerated the cruelty committed by
the respondent for sometime and unable to overcome the same, the 1st
petitioner has filed a petition for divorce in H.M.O.P.No.177 of 2013, on the
file of the learned Principal Sub Judge, Villupuram. Further it is alleged by
the petitioners that pending H.M.O.P.No.177 of 2013, the respondent had
filed a complaint dated 26.11.2013 before the Protection Officer, District
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
Social Welfare Office, Cuddalore, alleging that she was subjected to
harassment at the hands of the petitioners and the said petition was
forwarded to the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate,
Parangipettai for necessary action. Accordingly, the said complaint filed
under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
2005, was taken on file in Crl.M.P.No.5731 of 2013. While so, the
respondent had filed another petition dated 10.01.2014 under Section 23 of
the P.W.D.V.A Act, 2005, seeking custody of the first son S.K.Ajay Veevyn
and the said petition was taken on file in C.M.P.No.130 of 2014 and after
contest, it came to be allowed in favour of the respondent on 26.05.2015.
Subsequent to that, the respondent has also filed a private complaint in
C.C.No.97/2014, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Parangipettai, against the petitioners for the alleged offence under Sections
294(b), 448, 498A, 406 IPC r/w. Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act
and Section 4 of the TN PWH Act. Challenging the same, the present
petition is filed and further the petitioners have filed Crl.M.P.No.1493 of
2015 to discharge them from the prosecution and the same was dismissed on
31.08.2016. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have also filed
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
CRP.NO.34 of 2016, however, the said petition also dismissed by the Lower
Court without any sufficient cause. Hence, challenging the said dismissal
order, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Though the above grounds have been raised by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, however, this Court is of the opinion the issue is
a triable issue and the grounds raised by the counsel for the petitioners are
all factual in nature and it requires appreciation of evidence and this Court
cannot decide the same in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code. It is left open to the petitioners to raise all the
grounds before the Court and the same shall be considered on its own merits
and in accordance with law. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the
proceedings pending before the Court below.
6.It is represented by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners that this Court may issue a direction to the Trial Court to
expedite the trial and complete the same as early as possible. He would
further submit that the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
may be dispensed with.
7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of directing the trial
court to dispose of C.C. No.97/2014 as expeditiously as possible as per
seniority of the case. The petitioners and respondent are directed to co-
operate with the trial court for the early completion of trial. Further, taking
into consideration the request as made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, his appearance before the trial court is dispensed with except for
their appearance for the purpose of receiving the copy of the proceedings
u/s 207 Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
and on the day on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any
particular reason, the presence of the petitioners is necessary, the trial court,
at its wisdom, shall direct their appearance on those days. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed.
24.08.2021
Speaking/Non Speaking order
Index : Yes/No
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
Internet: Yes/No
sk
To
1. The Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore.
2. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Parangipettai.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
Sk
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.3984 & 3985 of 2019
http://www.judis.nic.in
Crl.O.P.No.7221 of 2019
24.08.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
