Madras High Court
L.Dharmalingam vs Suryaprabha on 16 October, 2024
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15492 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 16.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15492 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)No.10164 of 2022
1.L.Dharmalingam
2.Jeya
3.M.Chella Durai
4.M.Malaiya Nadar
5.M.Kumari
6.V.Pon Perumal
7.P.Vijaya
8.Rethinavathi ... Petitioners/Respondents No.1 to 7 and 12
vs.
Suryaprabha ... Respondent/Complainant
Prayer:- Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for
the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings filed by the respondent
in C.C.No.469 of 2018 pending before the file of the learned Additional
Mahila Court (Magisterial Level) Nagercoil and quash the same as illegal
as against the petitioners alone.
For Petitioners : M/s.T.Seeni Syed Amma
For Respondent : Mr.M.Saravanakumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/4
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15492 of 2022
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the proceedings
in C.C.No.469 of 2018 pending on the file of the learned Additional
Mahila Court (Magisterial Level) Nagercoil.
2.The case is a private complaint filed by the first respondent
herein under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure complaining
an offence under Sections 120, 197, 494, 498A r/w Section 34 of IPC. The
gravamen of the allegations with reference to the bigamy is that
eventhough originally a divorce petition was filed in H.M.O.P.No.74 of
2004 and the same was decreed on 11.07.2005 against the first
respondent's wife, even after knowing that the respondent has filed
A.S.No.76 of 2005 and the appeal is pending, the first accused married the
second accused at Nagarcoil, Kumara Kovil on 28.08.2006. Subsequently,
the decree of divorce granted was set aside by the judgment dated
28.09.2007 made in A.S.No.76 of 2005. As such, the action of the accused
amounts to bigamy and the same also amounts to cruelty on the first
respondent and hence, the complaint.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15492 of 2022
3.When the matter came up for hearing, the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners would submit that subsequently, the
first petitioner had filed C.M.S.A(MD)No.10 of 2008 as against the
judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.76 of 2005 and by a judgment and
decree dated 26.04.2023, the CMSA was allowed and thereby, the divorce
originally granted by the trial Court stands restored.
4.In view thereof, the same would date back to the original order
of the trial Court granting divorce. When the said order has since become
final and the marriage is subsequent to the divorce, neither the offence
under Section 494 of IPC nor the other consequential offences alleged
would no longer be made out. In view thereof, this Criminal Original
Petition deserves to be allowed and accordingly the impugned proceedings
in C.C.No.469 of 2018 shall stand quashed. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
16.10.2024
NCC : Yes / No
sji
To
The Additional Mahila Court (Magisterial Level) Nagercoil.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15492 of 2022
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
sji
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15492 of 2022
16.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
