Madras High Court
M.V.P.Mariappan vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 November, 2014
Author: S.Vaidyanathan
Bench: S.Vaidyanathan
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.11.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20786 of 2014 M.V.P.Mariappan ... Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thillai Nagar Police Station, Trichy City. ... Respondents PRAYER Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the second respondent to register the complaint lodged by the petitioner dated 09.09.2014. !For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balakrishnan 6For Respondents : Mr.P.Kandasamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) *** :ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking direction to the second respondent to register the complaint lodged by the petitioner, dated 09.09.2014.
2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the husband of one Vijayarani, who was practising as an Advocate at Thoothukudi from 1992, and she was appointed as Judicial Magistrate in the year 2001 and posted at Manamadurai and at that time, the second accused viz., Jafarullakhan was working as Chief Judicial Magistrate at Sivagangai District. The petitioner further submitted that out of wedlock, on 29.11.2005, the first accused Vijayarani and the petitioner have got a male child. As there was a difference of opinion, when the first accused Vijayarani was at Coimbatore as Judicial Magistrate, the petitioner started maintaining distance expecting a change for the better. In the meantime, an enquiry was conducted by the High Court, Madras, against the first accused and the petitioner has advised the first accused to avoid unlawful activities. Since his advice was not to her liking, she sought the help of the second accused Jafarullakhan and the second accused Jafarullakhan started moving very closely with the first accused Vijayarani. The male child born to the petitioner was taken by the first accused Vijayarani.
3.The first accused and the petitioner celebrated the first birthday of their son Aravind on 29.11.2006 and even though the second accused Jafarullakhan was not invited to the function, he came and attended the function and subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the first accused invited him without the knowledge of the petitioner. Since the petitioner had a doubt with the activities of the first and second accused, he advised the first accused not to involve in unlawful/illegal activities and to disconnect the illegal relationship with the second accused. According to the petitioner, the first accused had an affair with the second accused and permanently separated from the petitioner in 2008. While the first accused was working as II Additional District Munsif, Trichy, in 2008, the petitioner was not cohabited with the first accused and due to illegal intimacy with the second accused Jafarullakhan, the first accused gave birth to a female child on 02.11.2009 at Lalitha Nursing Home, Thillai Nagar. Being a judicial officer, both the accused ought to have been a role model of discipline, honest and should have maintained the decorum of the Court. Instead, apart from unlawful activities, it is stated that they have continued the illegal intimacy.
4.The petitioner, through the additional typed set of papers, drew the attention of this Court to the letter of the first accused Vijayarani, dated 26.09.2008 wherein it was stated that the petitioner was harassing the first accused and hence, it was not possible for her to live with the petitioner and decided to live separate from the petitioner. The petitioner is also stated that he has made a complaint and brought to the attention of the High Court, Madras, about the unlawful/illegal activities of both the accused and also illegal relationship of the first accused with the second accused. When they were living separately for years, more particularly from 2008, as could be seen from the letter of the first accused, dated 26.09.2008, a female child was born on 02.11.2009 viz., after 14 months from the date of her letter would clearly show that there was no intimacy between the petitioner and the first accused and hence, the female child was born to the second accused. The petitioner has stated that he has also written a letter on 12.11.2012 stating that if DNA test is done, it would come to light that the first accused Vijayarani gave a birth to the female child out of the illegal intimacy with the second accused Jafarullakhan. Therefore, the petitioner vehemently contended that it is the case of adultery and Section 497 I.P.C. would clearly attract. Apart from that, as the first and second respondent are involved in cheating, they are liable to be punished in terms of Section 417 I.P.C. The petitioner has also stated that he has been receiving a threatening call from the second accused and he has also mentioned the phone numbers of the first and second accused in his letter dated 09.09.2014.
5.A reading of Section 497 and 417 of I.P.C. shows that it is not a case of cognizable offence which falls under the principles laid down in Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P. & others [2013 (4) Crimes 243 (SC)]. If the female child born to the first accused is not out of the relationship with the petitioner and the first accused, then it is shocking and it has got to be seriously taken note of. But this is not the stage or the place where the point addressed by the petitioner can be answered. Therefore, the petitioner will have to move the appropriate forum to get appropriate relief either for punishing the accused for adultery or for conducting DNA test. Though this Court, after reading the petition, expressed its shock, feels that if the case of the petitioner is true, appropriate steps have got to be initiated by the petitioner in accordance with law. Therefore, this Court finds that it is not the case for registration of the complaint given by the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that this order will not preclude the petitioner from initiating appropriate proceedings against the accused or any one in accordance with law.
24.11.2014 srm To
1.The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City.
2.The Inspector of Police, Thillai Nagar Police Station, Trichy City.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai.
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J srm Crl.O.P.(MD)No.20786 of 2014 24.11.2014