0

Madras High Court directs, The Inspector of Police to recover the money and gold and hand over to the petitioner even there are pending cases.

blog, Blog , , ,

TITLE: C. Sivaraja Vs. The Superintendent of Police.

Decided On: September 11, 2023.

Writ Petition (MD) No.18635 of 2021.

CORAM:  Hon’ble Mr. Justice N. Nirmal Kumar.

Facts:

The marriage between the petitioner and the third respondent was solemnized on 25.01.2021 at Nilakottai. The marriage was initiated by his wife’s family. Prior to the marriage, there were frequent meetings between them. During one such meeting, the third respondent informed that her parents were unable to arrange for money to celebrate the marriage function and hence, requested the petitioner to assist by giving Rs.5,00,000/-, which was received by the respondents 5 and 6 on 02.12.2020. After receipt of Rs.5,00,000/-, the marriage was solemnized on 25.01.2021. At that time, the petitioner’s father. given 10 sovereigns of gold chain and ½ sovereign of Mangalsutra to the third respondent and the petitioner’s father incurred an expenditure of Rs.3,62,000/-. Three days after the marriage, the third respondent went to her house for writing B.P.Ed. Examination and informed that she would return back within few days. On the contrary, the third respondent and her family members lodged a false complaint against the petitioner suppressing the real facts. Hence, the petitioner sent a petition, regarding the false complaint lodged by the third respondent.

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking to take action against the respondents 3 to 7, who are his wife and in-laws, for threatening and cheating him and his parents, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and 10 ½ sovereigns of gold chain and to recover the same from them, based on his complaint, dated 26.04.2021.

Legal Analysis and Decision:

The Cases are pending on both the petitioner and the 3rd respondent in the cases in Crime Nos. 10 of 2022 and 16 of 2022 had been registered against both of them and their family members. Now, investigation has been completed. Crime No.10 of 2022 registered against the petitioner and four of his family members for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406 and 506(ii) I.P.C., is taken on file as C.C.No.597 of 2022, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai. Crime No. 16 of 2022 registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 506(i) I.P.C. against the respondents 3 to 7 is taken on file as C.C.No.402 of 2022 by the learned Judicial Magistrate,   Nilakottai. Both the cases are pending trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai. The 3rd respondent filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.110 of 2022 for divorce under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul and the same is pending.

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the second respondent to take action against the respondents 3 to 7 for threatening and cheating the petitioner and his parents a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and 10 ½ sovereigns of gold chain and further direction to the second respondent to recover the same from them and hand over it to the petitioner, based on his complaint date 26.04.2021, which is much prior to the registration of the criminal cases against both the groups. The court left it open to the parties to put forth their contentions before the Trial Court in the pending cases.

Conclusion:

Even though there are pending cases before the trail court the Madras High Court directed, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Nilakottai to recover the  Rs.5,00,000/- and 10 ½ sovereigns of gold chain and hand over it to the petitioner as the petitioner complained prior to filing a case.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY JANGAM SHASHIDHAR.

Click here to view Judgement

0

Madras High Court quashes the proceedings instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the petitioners.

Blog, blog , , ,

Case Title:  Dhanapalan and Ors.                         

                         Versus

                  Inspector of Police All Women Police Station, and Anr.

Date of Decision:    Reserved On 30.06.2023.

                                Pronounced On 07.07.2023.

Coram: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR.

Citation: CRL.O.P.No.27020 and Crl.M.P.Nos. 16586 & 16587 of 2022

Introduction:

Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.194 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Manargudi. This is the case of matrimonial dispute between the wife and husband. Based on the complaint of the defacto complainant, the case in Crime No.11 of 2021 registered mechanically without application of mind by the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent failed to note the entire complaint and statement of the witnesses, registered the case under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harrassment of Women Act. The essential ingredients of the provision of Women Harassment like “Any Educational Institution, temple or other place of worship, bus stop, road, railway station, cinema theatre, park, beach, place of festival, public service vehicle or vessel or any other place” never mentioned in the final report filed by the 1st respondent and therefore, the final report itself is liable to be quashed.

Facts:

On 25.10.2013, the 2nd respondent / defacto complainant married one Loganathan, who is arrayed as A1 in this case, at Marina Mahal, Thiruvarur. At the time of the marriage, the parents of the defacto complainant gifted 22 Sovereigns of gold jewels to her, 5 Sovereigns to  her husband/A1, Maruthi K-10 Car worth about Rs.4.75 Lakhs, along with the utensils, household articles worth about rupees two lakhs. After the marriage, the 1st accused/husband and the petitioners herein, who are in-laws of the defacto complainant, harassed her by demanding additional dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- and luxury car. At the instigation of A4, A1 had abused and beaten the defacto complainant by demanding more dowry. In the meanwhile, the defacto complainant delivered a female child; her husband/A1 left her in her parental home nearly nine months never bothered to visit and enquire about the second respondent and the new born child and later, on the advice of elders of both sides, she was taken to matrimonial home. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners herein made comments that the defacto complainant and A1 are dusky skin, but the child is a fair skin, something else in the birth of the child. Since the in-laws are continuously giving torture by demanding dowry, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thiruvarur, the same was taken on file in C.S.R.No.209/2018, after the complaint, A1 endorsed that hereinafter he will never demand dowry. After that, the Company, where A1 working, sent him to the Poland Country, for training. A1 took her along with the child to Poland and continued to harass, gave mental stress to her, at the instance of her in-laws.

Legal Analysis and Decision:

In the charge sheet, except for a general and omnibus allegation, there is no specific allegation against the petitioners more so after return from Poland. Thus, the earlier incidents prior to 09.06.2019, the day when the defacto complainant left to Poland with Loganathan/A1, all condoned. Thereafter only, both Loganathan/A1 and the second respondent/defacto complainant joined together and residing in Poland. During the period of stay in Poland and after return from Poland on 01.07.2020, these petitioners have no role. There is no specific and distinct allegation against them, except for general allegations. The case is an outcome of matrimonial dispute. The Apex Court finding tendency of implicating immediate relations of estranged husband not uncommon, advised to take pragmatic realities into consideration.The return of jewels and car not seriously disputed, recorded in Crl.O.P.No.25050 of 2021. Further, interim maintenance is being paid by Loganathan/A1. From the above order, it is seen that interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- to be paid until the issues were resolved at the Mediation Centre. It is seen now the Mediation failed. In view of the same, the petitioners to ensure that Loganathan/A1 to pay Rs.20,000/- as per the earlier order of the Trial Court, unless the said order is modified or cancelled.

On careful perusal of the Charge sheet, the allegations made taken at their face value and accepted in its entirety, do not, prima facie, constitute any offence or make out a case against the petitioners, who are in-laws. Further, the complaint is manifestly attended with mala fide and the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the petitioners, who are in-laws of the second respondent/defacto complainant. Hence, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY JANGAM SHASHIDHAR.

Click here to view Judgement