Madras High Court
D.Vidhya vs R.Saravanakumar on 23 June, 2021
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 24.09.2020
PRONOUNCED ON : 23.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 and Crl.M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2015 and
Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017
Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015:
1.D.Vidhya
2.M.Jothi
3.K.Rajagopal
4.A.Dhanasekaran
5.R.Sakunthala
6.D.Umarani ... Petitioners/Accused
Vs.
R.Saravanakumar ... Respondent/Complainant
Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017:
R.Saravanakumar ... Petitioner/Complainant
Vs.
1.D.Vidhya
2.M.Jothi
3.K.Rajagopal
4.A.Dhanasekaran
5.R.Sakunthala
6.D.Umarani ... Respondents/Accused
PRAYER in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015: Criminal Original Petition is filed
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records
and to quash the complaint in C.C.No.101 of 2015 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate No.1, Dharmapuri, against the petitioners.
Page No.1 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
PRAYER in Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017: Criminal Original Petition is filed
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the Judicial
Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri to dispose of the case in C.C.No.101 of 2015
within the timeframe as stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioners
in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 : Mr.N.Vijaya Basker
For Respondent
in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 : Mr.R.Jayaprakash
For Petitioner
in Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017 : Mr.R.Jayaprakash
For Respondents
in Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017 : Mr.N.Vijaya Basker
*****
COMMON ORDER
Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 has been filed by the petitioners/A1 to A6 to quash the proceedings pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Dharmapuri in C.C.No.101 of 2015.
2.Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017 has been filed by the defacto complainant to direct the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri to dispose of the proceedings in C.C.No.101 of 2015 within the time frame. Page No.2 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
3.Since both the petitions are filed seeking relief in C.C.No.101 of 2015, this Court decides to dispose both petitions by way of common order. For the sake of convenient and brevity, the petitioners and the respondent are referred to as accused and complainant as per the complaint.
4.The complainant filed a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.101 of 2015 against the respondents/accused (A1 to A6) for offence under Sections 420, 406, 465, 468 and 471 IPC.
5.The gist of the case is that A1 is the elder daughter of A4 and A6, who got married to the complainant. A2 aunt and junior mother of A1. A3 and A5 are the grandparents of A1. The marriage between A1 and the complainant took place on 06.02.2012 in Dharmpauri. Prior to it, the grandparents of A1 (A2 & A5) approached one Sathyaselan, a marriage broker. A1 was projected as though she completed B.E., and was working in M/s.Wipro Software Company, Chennai. On 20.11.2012, the complainant along with his parents had visited the house of A1 and thereafter, on 14.12.2011, the betrothal was held and later, marriage held on 06.02.2012. During the marriage, customary Page No.3 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 pleasantries were exchanged. After the marriage, the attitude of A1 was not proper and she used to remove sacred Thali and through it away in a playful manner. The mother of A1 (A6) used to spread tantrums against the complainant to the neighbours. All the accused used to come to the house of the complainant and create trouble and scene. On 02.04.2012, A1, her parents (A4 & A6) along with one Ranganathan had come to the house of the complainant, demanded return of jewels and valuabes presented during the marriage. On the same day, at about 05.00 p.m., before the Inspector of Police, B1 Dharmapuri Police Station, Dharmapuri an undertaking was obtained for return of jewels and valuables. Thereafter, A1 accompanied the complainant to live with him and both of them proceeded to Chennai.
6.The complainant was deputed to France for an assignment, hence he requested the passport, certificates and other credentials of A1, so that arrangements could be made to both of them. A1 was giving one reason or other and delayed in handing over the documents. Since the attitude of A1 created some doubt, the complainant made an enquiry with the educational institution where A1 said to have studied and worked. On enquiry, it was found that A1 had not completed her degree and further on 11.08.2011 itself, Page No.4 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 she deserted her job from M/s.Just Dial Private Limited. This was suppressed by the accused. During the betrothal certificate, an agreement was drawn and in the marriage invitation, the educational qualification of A1 was mentioned falsely. Thus, A1 without completing a degree and not working in M/s.Wipro Software company had given false particulars and got married to the complainant. Further, it is found that even the horoscope of A1 has been prepared with false particulars to match the horoscope of the bride groom.
7.During engagement, the father of A1 (A4) stated that he was working as Assistant Agricultural Officer in Pappireddipatty, which also turned to be false. As early as on 30.06.2011, A4 attained superannuation and retired from service. Thus, all the accused joined together and gave false particulars right from the beginning of the marriage, misled and cheated the complainant. When the same was questioned, as an offensive, a false case has been lodged against the complainant as though the complainant and his family members demanded dowry from A1's family. The complainant filed a divorce petition in O.P.No.119 of 2012 against A1 before the Sub Court, Dharmapuri. To cause annoyance and to give trouble to the complainant and his family members, the petitioners were filing one complaint or other in various forums Page No.5 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 to defame and degrade them and further, undue demand was made to settle the issues. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint on 16.06.2012 to the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Dharmapuri, but no action was taken. Hence, the complainant filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in Crl.O.P.No.7250 of 2013, in which this Court had granted permission to the complainant to file a private complaint, by order dated 10.09.2013. Hence, the complainant filed a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri, which was taken as C.C.No.101 of 2015.
8.During trial, the complainant examined four witnesses as PW1 to PW4, the accused failed to cross examine the witnesses instead filed the above quash petition in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015.
9.The learned counsel for the accused in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 submitted that during marriage, the complainant, his father and mother demanded additional dowry and insisted A1 to present 10 sovereigns of jewels, car, cash of Rs.5,00,000/- and 5 kgs of silver. After intervention of the elders, the marriage between them was held in grand manner. During marriage, A1 was presented with 55 sovereign of gold jewels, 2 kgs of silver Page No.6 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 articles and cash of Rs.2,50,000/-. Not satisfied with the same, after the marriage the demand for more dowry was persistent. From the date of marriage, the complainant harassed and tortured A1. Unable to bear the torture and harassment, A1 lodged a complaint to the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tambaram. During enquiry, the complainant and his family members agreed to return the jewels, cash and valuables to the accused. On the said undertaking, no case was registered. Later the complainant failed to return the jewels and valuables as per undertaking. Thereafter, the complaint was forwarded to the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Harur on the point of jurisdiction and a case in Crime No.29 of 2012 was registered. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in C.C.No.33 of 2013 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Harur for offence under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b) and 506(i) IPC. The parents of the complainant filed a quash petition before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.26939 of 2012 to quash the FIR in Crime No.29 of 2012 and thereafter, the same was dismissed as withdrawn. Since several cases were pending before this Court between the complainant and the accused family, this Court referred all the matters to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, but dispute could not be resolved and no compromise reached. Now, the case against the complainant Page No.7 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 and his parents in C.C.No.33 of 2012 and the maintenance case in M.C.No.15 of 2012 are pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Harur.
10.The learned counsel for the accused further submitted that the complainant's is an influential person and was working in the Police Department has been filing one petition or other in various forums and thereby, dragged the accused from one Court to another and caused harassment by questioning the character of A1. Unable to withstand the continuous torture and harassment caused by the family members of the complainant, A1 attempted to commit suicide by jumping from upstairs of the house, sustained grievous injuries and she was taken to the Government Hospital, Dharmapuri, later shifted to Surya Hospital, Namakkal for further treatment and got discharged. Thus, the above complaint in C.C.No.101 of 2015 was filed by the complainant with ulterior motive to harass the accused.
11.The learned counsel for the accused further submitted that a divorce petition in O.P.No.119 of 2012 is pending before the Sub Court, Dharmapuri. The complainant being a son of the Police officer is lodging one case or other and so far 35 cases have been filed in various forums against the accused. Page No.8 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 One of the case went to the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court condemned the attitude of the complainant and his father and imposed cost for making frivolous complaint against the accused. The complainant is retaining the gold jewels, silver articles and valuables presented during the marriage.
12.Thus, the complaint is a motivated one which has been filed to exert pressure on the accused to settle the matrimonial dispute. In view of the same, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
13.The learned counsel for the respondent/complainant submitted that the marriage between the complainant and A1 took place on 06.02.2012. During the marriage, customary presentations were exchanged. Prior to the marriage, A2 to A6 projected A1 as though she completed B.E., Engineering and was working in M/s.Wipro Software Company and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. Immediately after the marriage, the behaviour and attitude of A1 was not proper and she used to remove the sacred Thali and throw it away in a casual manner and she used to continuously speak with someone in mobile phone at odd hours. When the same was questioned, she started abusing the complainant and his family members. Thereafter, the complainant informed Page No.9 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 the attitude of A1 to her family members. To solve the issue, a meeting with the elders in the family took place and it was decided that A1 would mend her ways. Within four days thereafter, again A1 started creating trouble in the matrimonial home and she left to her parents house. Thereafter, the accused came to the complainant's house, created a scene and demanded return of jewels, cash and valuables. Having no other option, the complainant approached the Inspector of Police, B1 Police Station, Dharmapuri, lodged a complaint. In the Police Station, undertaking was obtained that all the marriage articles and valuables to be handed over to the accused. After that, A1 refused to go with her parents, instead forced the complainant to take her to Chennai. Thereafter, the complainant and A1 had gone to Chennai and resided in Chrompet for sometime. During that period, the parents of A1 had come there, created trouble with the complainant and lodged a complaint to the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tambaram, made demand for return of jewels and articles and again another undertaking was obtained and the complainant was let off. The complaint was later forwarded to the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Harur and the same was registered in Crime No.29 of 2012. On completion of investigation, charge sheet filed in C.C.No.33 of 2013 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Harur Page No.10 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 and the trial is in progress. In the meanwhile, the accused started giving false complaint against the complainant and his family members and sofar from 14.05.2012 to 22.12.2016, A1 and A4 initiated 22 complaints against the complainant and his family members before various forums.
14.The learned counsel for the respondent/complainant further submitted that on 14.08.2015, a false complaint was lodged before the Inspector of Police, B1 Police Station, Dharmapuri as though when the accused attended the Court in C.C.No.101 of 2015, the complainant threatened that she would be attacked with Acid. The complaint dated 14.08.2015 was registered in C.S.R.No.483 of 2015 and thereafter, on enquiry the case was closed as false in nature. Thus, the accused by making false allegations against the complainant and his family members, filed several cases against them before various forums.
15.During trial in C.C.No.101 of 2015, on the side of the complainant sofar 4 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW4. The accused has not chosen to cross examine the witnesses and filed the above quash petition to drag and protract the trial. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the quash Page No.11 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017 petition and also sought for direction to complete the trial within a stipulated time.
16.This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.
17.The marriage between the A1 and the complainant is an arranged marriage, which had taken place on 06.02.2012. Earlier there was exchange of horoscope, comparison was done and found suitable. Thereafter, cusotmary visits had taken place and betrothal was held and later, marriage was conducted. After the marriage, there seems to be some dispute between the A1 and the complainant. Later, it was found that the representation made by the accused family about the educational qualification, job credentials etc., turned to be false. Further, it was found that even the horoscope of A1 had been tailored to suit the horoscope of the complainant. The complainant received some information with regard to the morality of A1. In between, there have been fight, emotional disturbance and wordy quarrel between the accused and the complainant and his family members.
Page No.12 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
18.The accused had come to the house of the complainant at Dharmapuri, created trouble, which led them to go before the B1 Police Station, Dharmapuri, wherein an undertaking was taken from the complainant family to handover the jewels and articles presented during the marriage. After undertaking, A1 refused to go along with her parents, instead she joined the complainant and proceeded to Chennai. Within few days thereafter, a complaint was lodged before the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tambaram. Again another undertaking was taken for handing over the jewels and valuables and the complaint was forwarded to the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Harur and FIR was registered in Crime No.29 of 2012. After investigation, charge sheet filed against the complainant and his family members which is pending trial in C.C.No.33 of 2012.
19.No doubt, the complainant and his father, a former Police personnel were giving complaints and filing cases not only against the accused, but also against the police officials. Almost all the complaint initiated against the Police officials were closed. Be that as it may, there seems to be deep animosity between them.
Page No.13 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
20.With regard to the above case on the private complaint of the complainant, a case in C.C.No.101 of 2015 has been taken on file. During trial, four witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW4. Without cross examining the witnesses, the above quash petition in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 has been filed. During the pendency of trial, several other complaints were lodged by the accused against the complainant.
21.On perusal of the evidence of PW1 to PW4 and the copy of the complaint, it is seen that there are prima facie material to proceed against the accused in this case and further, the contentions putforth by the accused are factual in nature and the same are to be decided only during trial in C.C.No.101 of 2015 and not by way of Quash Petition in Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015.
22.On the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the trial and accordingly, Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2015 stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Page No.14 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
23.Since the case in C.C.No.101 of 2015 has been pending for the past six years, the trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period of six months from the date of lifting of lock down and commencement of normal functioning of Courts. Accordingly, Crl.O.P.No.4750 of 2017 stands disposed of.
24.It is seen that two cases in C.C.Nos.33 of 2012 and 101 of 2015 are pending between the petitioners and the respondent before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dhamapuri. Both the cases arises out in connection and pursuant to the marriage between Saravanakumar and Vidhya held on 06.02.2012 and the issues are intertwined. Hence, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri is directed to try both the two cases simultaneously and separately and to conclude the trial of the cases within 6 months from the date of commencement of normal functioning of the Courts.
23.06.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vv2
Page No.15 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 and 4750 of 2017
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
To
The Judicial Magistrate No.I,
Dharmapuri.
PRE-DELIVERY ORDERS IN
Crl.O.P.Nos.23872 of 2015 & 4750 of 2017
23.06.2021
Page No.16 of 16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/