Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mr.Anandadeep Mandal vs Ms.Ruchi Sharma
2021 Latest Caselaw 22818 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 22818 Mad
Judgement Date : 22 November, 2021

Madras High Court
Mr.Anandadeep Mandal vs Ms.Ruchi Sharma on 22 November, 2021
                                                                                       Crl.O.P. No.4694 of 2017




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED: 22.11.2021

                                                          CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

                                              Crl. O.P. No.4694 of 2017
                                         and Crl.M.P.Nos.3548 & 3549 of 2017

                1.Mr.Anandadeep Mandal

                2.Mr.Pravatranjan Mandal

                3.Smt.Jhumur Mandal                                                   ..Petitioners

                                                           Vs.

                Ms.Ruchi Sharma                                         ..Respondent
                PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal
                Procedure Code, praying to call for the records of the proceedings in
                D.V.A.No.4 of 2016, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.V of Coimbatore
                and quash the same as illegal, incompetent without jurisdiction.
                                        For Petitioners     : Mr.T.Elumalai
                                        For Respondent      : Mr.P.Mahesh Kumar

                                                     ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records of the

proceedings in D.V.A.No.4 of 2016, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.V

of Coimbatore and quash the same.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.1/5 Crl.O.P. No.4694 of 2017

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the

respondent.

3. The private complaint has been filed under Domestic Violence Act

directing the petitioners 1 to 3 to return back the sum of Rs.16.5 lakhs and 8

sovereigns of gold which was taken by them at the time of marriage and

10 sovereigns of gold given at the time of marriage which is in the custody of

the petitioners No. 1 to 3 herein. Besides, Rs.1 crore as compensation for

damages for the injuries, caused by the act of the Domestic Violence.

4.The learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that this private

complaint is nothing but result of frustration in the matrimonial life.

The allegations in the complaint were pressed into service when the petitioners

parted with the money and the alleging cruelty, coercion and payment of

amount was also pressed into service without any evidence. Further, his

contention that between the defacto complainant and her husband, the divorce

proceedings were pending in H.M.O.P.No.14 of 2016 on the file of the II

Additional Special Judge, Coimbatore. After proper evidence, divorce was

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.2/5 Crl.O.P. No.4694 of 2017

granted after full trial and the Court below has clearly recorded the fact that the

allegations raised by both the husband and wife are not established and

accordingly, the divorce was granted by mutual consent. Now, it is submitted

that the defacto complainant had died. In such view of the matter nothing

survives in this petition.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that they

made an application to implead the legal heirs of the defacto complainant on

record and oppose this petition.

6.This Court has perused the entire materials available on record.

Though general allegations are made, the application has been primarily filed

before the Trial Court for return of amount of Rs.16.50 lakhs said to have been

paid to the parents of the husband. But, in the complaint, it is nowhere the

calculation has been arrived at, except few contentions in para 4 of the petition

that certain amount has been spent towards the marriage amounting to

Rs.8 lakhs. There is no whisper whatsoever made in the entire petition as to

how Rs.16.5 lakhs could be arrived by the defacto complainant.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.3/5 Crl.O.P. No.4694 of 2017

7. The fact remains that the matrimonial dispute has ended in

H.M.O.P.No.14 of 2016 itself. The Trial Court has clearly indicated in para 8

of its judgment that the allegation levelled against each other as to the cruelty

was not proved. Particularly, the allegation raised against the husband is not

established as no evidence has been adduced before the Trial Court and

concluded as though there was no domestic violence as against the wife by her

husband. Therefore, the continuance of the private complaint is abuse of

process of law. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and as

a sequel, the proceedings in D.V.A.No.4 of 2016 is quashed. Consequently,

connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

22.11.2021 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No msv

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4/5 Crl.O.P. No.4694 of 2017

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

msv

Crl. O.P. No.4694 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3548 & 3549 of 2017

22.11.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.5/5

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter