Madras High Court
E.Vijayan vs The Inspector Of Police on 25 April, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :25.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Crl.OP No.7989 of 2019
& Crl MP.No.4334 of 2019
1.E.Vijayan
2.Amudha
3.V.Susmitha
4.Subathra
5.Suvetha .. Petitioners
Vs
1.The Inspector of Police,
Melmaruvathur Police Station,
Kancheepuram District,
in Crime no.395 of 2017
2.Elavarsi .. Respondents
Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to
quash the case in CC No.194 of 2018 pending on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Maduranthagam.
For Petitioners :Mr.M.R.Thangavel for M/s.Balamurugane
For Respondent :Mr.Vinothkumar, GA (crl.side) for R1
ORDER
This Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash
the case in CC No.194 of 2018 pending on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Maduranthagam.
2.Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned
Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the Respondent police.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3.The learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the first
petitioner is the father and the second petitioner is the mother. The
petitioners 3 to 5 are the daughters. Regarding an incident that had
occurred on 14.05.2017, by around 9.15am, wherein, the second
Respondent's brother by name Prasanth is alleged to have mis-behaved
with one of the daughters of the first and second Petitioners. The first
Petitioner is alleged to have scolded the brother of the second
Respondent/Defacto complainant. Also he had lodged a complaint in the
Melmaruvathur Police Station, which was registered in Crime no.394 of
2017 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 506 (II) r/w Section
4 of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Harassment of Women Act. After
registering the case, the brother of the second Respondent /Defacto
Complainant was arrested at about 1.00 pm and sent for remand to the
Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Maduranthagam. The second
Respondent, who is the sister of the said Prasanth had with an ulterior
motive, preferred a complaint by 2.30pm on the same day. Based on
which, an FIR was also registered in Crime no.395 of 2017, a copy of
which is available in the typed set. The Investigating Officer, had clearly
stated that the complaint, which was registered in Cr.No.395 of 2017 is
without any basis and therefore, further action was dropped, against
which, the second Respondent had preferred a Protest Petition in CC
No.194 of 2018. In the meanwhile, the FIR in Crime No.394 of 2017 was
investigated and on the completion of the investigation, final report of the
investigation has been laid before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Maduranthagam in CC No.194 of 2018. As against the Protest Petition,
the petitioners had filed this Criminal Original Petition seeking to quash the
Protest Petition filed by the second respondent in CC No.194 of 2018.
During the pendency of Crl.OP No.7989 of 2019, the trial proceedings in
CC No.194 of 2018 was conducted against the accused/the brother of the
second respondent/defacto complainant herein by name Prasanth, and
later, he was acquitted.
4.The learned Counsel for the Petitioners had submitted that the
Protest Petition filed by the second respondent /defacto complainant
herein in CC No.194 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Maduranthagam is liable to be quashed as it is a counter blast to the FIR
registered in Crime no.395 of 2017, pending on the file of the
Melmaruvathur Police Station, Kancheepuram District.
5.Even though, the name of the Counsels for the second
respondent/defacto complainant printed in the cause list, none of the
Counsel appeared for the second respondent /defacto complainant.
6.The learned Government Advocate(Cri.side) has advanced his
arguments. As per the submissions of the learned Government
Advocate(Cri.side) both the FIRs in Crime nos.394 & 395 of 2017 were
taken up for investigation and since the Investigation Officer has found
out during the investigation in Crime no.395 of 2017 that it has been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
made with the mala fide intention and as a counter blast to the complaint
made by the petitioners herein in Cr.No.394 of 2017, the further action
was closed. The petitioners herein filed this Criminal Original Petition
challenging the Protest Petition, which had been filed by the second
respondent in CC.194 of 2018. Therefore, the learned Government
Advocate(Cri.side) submitted that the Investigating Officer had rightly
dropped the further proceedings.
7.Considering the rival submissions and the fact that the learned
Counsel for the Petitioners produced the Daily Status of the case in CC
No.190 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate II,
Maduranthagam, regarding the judgment of acquittal recorded by him in
Case no.190 of 2017 in the case of Sub Inspector of Police,
Melmaruvathur Vs. Prasanth.
8. Recording the same, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed
and the proceedings in CC No.194 of 2018 pending on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate II, Maduranthagam is hereby quashed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
25.04.2022
dn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Melmaruvathur Police Station,
Kancheepuram District.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP.J,
dn
Crl.OP No.7989 of 2019
25.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
