Madras High Court
K.Arul @ Arul Prakasam vs Tmt.Vijayalakshmi on 11 March, 2015
Author: S. Manikumar
Bench: S.Manikumar
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.03.2015 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR Crl.R.C.No.454 of 2013 K.Arul @ Arul Prakasam .. Petitioner Vs Tmt.Vijayalakshmi .. Respondent Criminal Revision filed under sections 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment of the appellate Court made in C.A.No.32 of 2011 dated 10.12.2011 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Cuddalore Division, Cuddalore District confirming the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore made in CMP No.300 of 2010 dated 07.04.2011 to the effect that the Respondent herein to reside at No.222/5, Dhana Lakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore with her two children and also not to harass the respondent and her two children mentally or physically and also allow his two children under the protection of the Respondent herein, but modifying the quantum of maintenance from Rs.5,000/- per month to Rs.3,500/- per month. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Arul @ Arul Prakasam (Party-in-Person) For Respondent : Mr.D.Ravichander O R D E R
Criminal Revision Case is directed against the judgment made in C.A.No.32 of 2011 dated 10.12.2011 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore. Earlier in Crl.M.P.No.300 of 2010, filed by the respondent/wife, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore, granted Residence order to the complainant to reside at Door No.222/5, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore, with her two children and also directed the Revision petitioner/husband to pay maintenance to them, at Rs.5,000/- per month. Direction, has also been granted not to harass the complainant and her two children, mentally or physically. On appeal in C.A.No.32 of 2011, the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, by judgment dated 10.12.2011 has reduced the quantum of maintenance from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.3,500/- per month and confirmed the other orders, passed by the trial Court.
2. Case of the wife, as deduced from the material on record, are as follows:
(i) On 03.09.1992, marriage between the parties to the lis was solemnised. Out of wedlock there were two children. At the time of taking the case on file, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, son, Ajay Prakash was aged 17 and daughter, Niveda was aged 12 years. Wife has submitted that at the time of marriage, as Stridhana, articles such as 15 sovereigns of Gold, 2 silver lamps, 2 silver bowls (Chimizh), cot, bureau, grinder, brass and eversilver vessels worth 3 Lakhs, were given by her parents. It is her further contention that at the time of marriage, husband was working in the Army. Thereafter, on 30.04.1997, he retired from Army.
(ii) Only for one year, after marriage, he was in good state of mind. Thereafter, the petitioner was suffering from intermittent psychopathic disorder. He ill treated, pushed her out of the house, beat her with lathi, visited the school, where the complainant worked as a teacher, sought for unnecessary information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 abused her, spoke ill about her chastity, paternity of the children and all the above acts, caused great hardship to her and affected the future of her children. On 03.04.2001, he beat her with a hot cooking pan. He also attempted to murder her by electrocution.
(iii) She has further stated that on 25.02.2006, petitioner has slapped her, for which, she had taken treatment. When she was staying in her parents house at No.LIG-54, Anna Nagar, Cuddalore on 15.05.2009, he entered into the said house, beat the applicant and her father. In this context, she preferred a complaint on 08.06.2009 to the All Women Police Station, Cuddalore and also to the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore, on 16.09.2009 respectively.
(iv) She has also filed HMOP No.105 of 2009 on the file of the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, for divorce. Wife has also filed O.S.No.31 of 2009 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Cuddalore, for a permanent injunction, restraining the petitioner/husband not to disturb her. Pending disposal of the abovesaid proceedings, a petition has also been made to the Social Welfare Officer. According to the applicant/wife, an enquiry has been conducted by the said authority. Thereafter, Crl.M.P.No.300 of 2010 has been taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore, under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The applicant has sought for, following reliefs,
(i)for a direction under Section 18 that husband/petitioner should not disturb wife, children and her family members
(ii) for a direction under Section 19 of the Act directing, the petitioner/husband to handover possession of the house, in which, she and her children were living and sent out.
(iii) for a direction, under Section 20 of the Act, for maintenance for herself and children at Rs.10,000/- per month.
(iv) for a direction, under Section 21 of the Act, for temporary custody of the children with her and consequently for an order against the husband not to disturb them.
(v)for a direction, under Section 22 of the Act, for compensation to herself and to the children.
(v) Before the Court below, alongwith the proof affidavit, wife has marked the following exhibits.
1.Ex.P1. - Lawyer's Notice sent by the petitioner/wife to the respondent/husband.
2.Ex.P2 - Copy of the petition filed for permanent injunction before the Principal District Munsif, Cuddalore.
3.Ex.P3, copy of the Discharge summary issued by Krishna Hospital, Cuddalore for taking treatment for the injuries caused by the respondent/husband.
4.Ex.P4 List of Stridhana Articles given at the time of Marriage.
5.Ex.P5 copy of Pay Slip (5 Nos.).
6.Ex.P6 Copy of the Marriage Invitation.
7.Ex.P7 Copy of the complaint dated 16.09.2009, given to the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore.
8.Ex.P8 Copy of the CSR dated 08.01.2009, given by the petitioner/wife to All Women Police Station, Cuddalore.
9.Ex.P9 - Copy of the complaint dated 08.06.2009, given by the petitioner/wife to All Women Police Station, Cuddalore.
10.Ex.P10 - Bill dated 07.02.2010 for paying the School Fee of the petitioner's son for one year.
11.Ex.P11 Copy of the sale deed dated 22.11.95, which stands in the name of the petitioner/wife.
12.Ex.P12 Copy of the proceedings dated 03.09.2001, of the Employees Provident Fund, for obtaining loan.
13.Ex.P13 - Copy of the proceedings dated 14.04.2004, of the Employees Provident Fund, for obtaining loan.
14.Ex.P14 Salary particulars of the petitioner/wife, while she was working as Teacher in Kullanjavadi during the period from 30.11.94 to 30.05.2003.
15.Ex.P15 - Salary particulars of the petitioner/wife, while she was in service in Manjakuppam Higher Sr. School during the period from 30.05.2003 to 30.06.2008.
16.Ex.P16 - Salary particulars of the petitioner/wife, while she was in service in Veppur Higher Sr. School during the period July 2008 to May 2009.
(vi) Apart from the testimony of wife, examined as PW.1, in the proceedings before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore, PW2, Son, Ajay Prakash, in his proof affidavit has stated that the petitioner had never shown love and affection to his mother and children. He has adduced evidence that the petitioner would behave, in a rough manner, beat and ill treat them. Whenever, the petitioner felt that something according to him was wrong, he would beat Ajay Prakash with lathi. Witness was scared of his father and always stayed in a room. In his proof affidavit, PW2, son, has further deposed that there was no limit for harassing his mother. Once his father beat his mother, in her thigh, with a hot pan. For the injury she had to take treatment. Thereafter, PW.2, had seen his mother being slapped on the cheek and on account of the injury, she had to take treatment for her twisted mouth. PW.2, has further stated that sometimes, the petitioner would push her out of the house and close the door. By compulsion, the petitioner would receive all his mother's income. The petitioner had never taken them outside nor bought anything to them. PW.2's maternal grandfather alone would buy things. School fees and other expenses, were incurred by his mother. Dresses were purchased only by his mother. Thus, in his proof affidavit, Ajay Prakash, PW2/son of the complainant, while supporting the version of his mother/complainant has also prayed for a direction against the petitioner for appropriate relief, for his higher eduction and permit them to stay in the house, which belonged to his mother, but, at the time of taking cognizance, was in possession of the petitioner.
3. Husband/petitioner, in his proof/counter affidavit has submitted that parties to marriage belong to different communities. Since 15.07.1980, he had served in the Army, without any blemish. When he was married, complainant/wife, though completed her Secondary Grade Training, had no permanent employment. Out of her compulsion, on 30.04.1997, he was prematurely discharged. On his request, Indian Army recommended to the Tamil Nadu State Government to provide her employment and accordingly, on 07.11.1994, she was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher. When he was taking care of the children, with the aid and encouragement, the complainant/wife completed her B.A., B.Ed., M.Phil. Children enjoyed all the concession granted by the Government, on the basis of his community certificate.
4. Petitioner/husband has denied all the allegations made against him. According to him, he had shown love and affection to his family. He had acted as per his conscience. When his son was under his direct supervision, he had secured 90% in Standard 10. He has further contended that due to the ill advice of others, wife has filed a suit in O.S.No.319 of 2009 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Cuddalore. With the very same averments, she has also filed HMOP No.105 of 2009, for divorce, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Cuddalore. Pending disposal of the same, she has filed Crl.M.P.No.300 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore, under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. According to him, for the past 17 years, since Marriage, there was no problem between the spouses. Thus, denying the allegations made against him, the petitioner/husband has prayed for dismissal of the petition. Husband has marked the following exhibits.
1.Ex.R1 Requisition letter of the petitioner/wife, to Indian Army.
2.Ex.R2 Interview Card and Written exams results dated 23.09.1989 and 09.10.1994 respectively.
3.Ex.R3 House Warming Ceremony Invitation dated 20.01.2002
4.Ex.R4 Letter written to the petitioner by Mr.Panduranga Pillai, grandfather of the petitioner.
5.Ex.R5 Marriage Registration Certificate (Petitioner Respondent)
6.Ex.R6 Premature Discharge settlement particulars of the respondent/husband.
7.Ex.R7 Treatment Records of the petitioner issued by ECHS.
8.Ex.R8 - Treatment Records of the PW2, Ajay Prakash issued by ECHS.
9.Ex.R9 APF and QSA statements of respondent/husband.
10.Ex.R10 O.P. Chit of Petitioner/wife, issued by Government Hospital, Chengalpet.
11.Ex.R11 List of Jewels (Appox. 32.2 sovereign)
12.Ex.R12 Documents relating to the home appliances purchased by the respondent from Military Canteen.
13.Ex.R13 Proof of Respondent's pension
14.Ex.R14 Particulars of some special concession to Ex. Servicemen of Indian Army.
15.Ex.R15 Copy of Fixed deposit receipts dated 11.10.2008 to 11.10.2010 in the name of the petitioner's father.
16.Ex.R16 Proof showing PW2 as legal heir/nominee for receiving benefits of Group Insurance.
17.Ex.R17 - Particulars of Eye Treatment of PW2 and purchase of spectaculars dated 27.07.2009
18.Ex.R18 Fee particulars issued by the School for XI Standard.
19.Ex.R19 Declaration Statement for ECHS attested by Notary Public.
20.Ex.R20 Photographs of respondent's Family Tour
5. After considering the pleadings and evidence, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore, vide order, dated 07.04.2011, has granted residence order, allowing the complainant/wife and children to reside at Door No.222/5, Dhana Lakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore and also granted maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to be paid, to the wife and children.
6. Being aggrieved by the said order, Criminal Appeal No.32 of 2011 has been filed by the husband/petitioner before the learned Sessions Court, Cuddalore, on the grounds, inter alia that the trial Court, ought to have taken into consideration, an important legal lacuna, in not marking the Domestic Violence Incident Report. It was also his contention that the trial Court erred in not considering the glaring discrepancies in the evidence of mother and son, Pws.1 and 2 respectively.
7. On the above grounds, the appellate Court, in the beginning of its judgment, has stated that the evidence adduced by the parties, should be carefully analysised and scrutinised. Adverting to the above, the appellate Court has observed that the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, has come to an irresistible conclusion that the husband/petitioner had inflicted cruelty, on the wife and exhibited the same attitude on the son also and also found that the version of PW.2, Ajay Prakash, son of the petitioner, was clinching, to prove the acts of domestic violence.
8. On the contention of the revision petitioner that there is no need to pay maintenance, since the wife was divorced, the appellate Court has found that the order in the Domestic Violence application, was passed on 07.04.2011, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore and whereas, divorce between the parties, was granted only on 20.10.2011, by the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore and thus, held that the order in Crl.M.P.No.300 of 2010, was earlier in point of time.
9. The appellate Court has also taken note of filing of C.M.A.No.74 of 2011, filed by the petitioner/husband, against the order of divorce. While adverting to the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner in T.K.Surendran v. State of Kerala reported in 2009 (83) AIC 312 (Ker.) = 2010 (3) Crimes 9 (Ker.), and Shasi Bhushan Narayanan Asad v. Deoki Panjhiyare reported in 2010 (95) AIC 791 (Jhar), wherein, it has been held that when the husband and wife are in employment in equal footing, the husband cannot be asked to maintain his wife and while applying the said decision, to the facts of the present case, the appellate Court has held that, as the wife is also employed, she need not be given maintenance, whereas, the children are entitled to maintenance and accordingly, modified the quantum of maintenance from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.3,500/-, to be paid to the children.
10. On the aspect of residence order, granted in favour of the wife and son, by the lower Court, the learned Principal Sessions Court, Cuddalore, by observing that even if divorce order is confirmed, the children would still be in requirement of a residence for dwelling and whether the status of the respondent-wife, continued to be the wife or not, still, that would not tilt the balance in any manner, in favour of the petitioner, for deciding the residence order. Thus, except modifying the quantum of maintenance, all other orders, passed by the trial Court, have been confirmed.
11. Being aggrieved by the abovesaid order, the petitioner-husband has filed the present revision case. A memo, dated 28.01.2014, has been filed by the learned counsel on record, for the petitioner, seeking permission to withdraw their appearance. Hence, Registry was directed to print the name of the petitioner, Mr.K.Arul @ Arul Prakasam. Husband, as party in person, made submissions.
12. The petitioner/party in person submitted that O.S.No.319 of 2009, has been filed on 18.08.2009, on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Cuddalore. I.A.No.1290 of 2009, has been filed in the said suit. According to him, on the same day, ie., on 18.08.2009, H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009, has been filed in Sub-Court, Cuddalore. Thus, both the suit as well as HMOP, have been filed in the Open Court, which, could not have been done by the respondent-wife.
13. In his written arguments, the petitioner has contended that the learned counsel for the wife has prepared three types of false applications, suit, divorce and a Miscellaneous Petition under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and therefore, the wife has played fraud, on the Court, while took the case on file, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. According to him, Miscellaneous Application, under the above Act, has been filed on 18.01.2010. As Courts are located in different places, by playing fraud, petitions have been filed in the open Court, on the same day and at the same time.
14. The petitioner has further submitted that Ex.P3, document, which he had described as O.P.Chit, has been forged. It is his further contention that filing of a forged document, in a judicial proceedings, is an offence, under Section 466 IPC. Apart apart from the written arguments, he has also stated that using a forged document, in the Court, as genuine, is also an offence under Section 471 IPC. Thus, when Ex.P3 document is forged, the respondent has committed offences, by filing the same under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It is also his contention that another document, dated 30.07.2009, a copy of the petition stated to be given to the Social Welfare Officer, is also forged.
15. Thirdly, the petitioner/party-in-person has submitted that the procedure contemplated under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, has not been followed. According to him, without FIR or the Domestic Violence Incident Report of the District Social Welfare Officer, under Section 9(b) of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. a complaint cannot be entertained. He has also alleged that both the District Protection Officer and the District Social Welfare Officer have cheated the Court.
16. Inviting the attention of this Court to the discussion of the learned Magistrate, on the prayer of the respondent-wife, seeking delivery of possession of the house, from which, she has claimed to have been evicted, along with the children, party-in-person has submitted that there is no clarity in the order, granting permission to reside in the share household at Door No.2-S, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore. According to him, it is just like an opinion and therefore, not a decision.
17. Inviting the attention of this Court to the opening sentence of the judgment of Crl.A.No.32 of 2011, dated 10.12.2012, wherein, the appellate Court has made a formal statement that the appeal came up on 04.10.2012 and the date on which, the judgment was delivered in the appeal, dated 10.12.2012, Mr.Arul, Party-in-Person, submitted that there is a mistake committed by the appellate Court.
18. It is his further contention that when H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009, for divorce, has been ordered on 20.10.2011, the respondent-wife, children are not entitled to maintenance. According to the party-in-person, PW.2, Ajay Prakash, was born on 25.07.1993 and on the date of passing of the interim order by the lower Court, ie., 07.04.2011, PW.2, has attained majority and hence, his son has obtained an order, by misrepresenting the age and thus, committed an illegality.
19. According to him, by misrepresenting and playing fraud, the respondent/wife has obtained orders from the lower Courts and thus, by describing the acts of the respondents and that of the public servants, viz., the District Protection Officer and the District Social Welfare Officer, as fraud, illegal, mis-representation and cheating, party-in-person has prayed to set aside the order, dated 07.04.2011 and the order passed in the appeal.
20. This Court also deems it fit to extract the written submissions, filed in this revision case, 1) On 1st motion the Respondent and the counsel prepared three type of false application of suit, Divorce and a criminal application under domestic violence Act 2005, which are collaterally filed in three open counts, dated 18.08.2009, 18.08.2009 and 18.01.2010 by playing utter fraud. It is ridiculously alleged that I am man of Psychopathic Mental disorder of mind, which is caused abnormal, aggressive and serious irresponsible conduct with other party.
2) On 2nd motion, he has been filed two application of suit and divorce (petition) in two open courts, Located in different places on the same date and time,by playing fraud.
3) On 3rd motion, he has been filed a permanent injunction petition along with suit, when two cases are filing by playing fraud.
4) On 4th motion, he has been created forged records, and filed along with suit, which are marked in the two application, When two cases are filing by playing fraud.
5) Further, he has been filed the created forged record of typed complaint petition under Domestic Violence Act 2005, Address to the District Social Welfare Officer, Forgery written the petition date as 30.07.2009, for expressing that the petition has been given earlier before of case filing.
6) Further, he has been filed the created forged Record of Govt, out-patient slip, Forgery written as date of Admission on 08.02.2009 and date of discharged as 09.02.2009. For expressing that the party concerned has been admitted as inpatient, by playing fraud.
7) Further, he has been filed and incorrect complaint petition dated, nil forgery certified by Woman Police Officer, for expressing that the complaint has been given earlier before of case filing.
II. Phenomena Points for Fraudulent and illegality:
Point No.1: The atrocity allegation of Psychopathic Mental disorder of mind, which is caused abnormal, aggressive and serious irresponsible conduct with other party is traced out from Hindu Marriage Act 1955, Defined under sub clause (iii) of clause (b) of section 13(1). Moreover this allegation has been omitted by Act 68 of 1976 for clause (iii) Therefore, fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.2 One petitioner cannot be filed two application in two various open court at a time in the same date. Therefore fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.3 An interim affidavit cannot be filed on the same date of two main applications are filing (or) cannot be filed symmetrically along with the main application. Therefore fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.4 A permanent injunction petition cannot be filed without getting any order/office. Therefore fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.5 Prosecution of more than one case with same allegation with in one year in the same jurisdiction (or) multiple orders for the same allegation is violation of Rule, Defined under Article 20(2) of the Constitution India 1950, Therefore illegality has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.6 Making of false document by dishonestly is an offence, Defined under clause (a) and (e) of section 464(1) of the IPC. Therefore illegality has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.7 Filing of forged records for purporting to be a record in a court of Justice in any proceeding is an offence, Defined under section 466 of the IPC. Substituted by Act 21 of 2000, section 91 and Schedule 1 for who ever forges (w.e.f 17.10.2000). The explanation for the purpose of this section Registered includes any list data (or) record of any entries maintained in the electronic form as defined in clause (or) of Sub-section (1) of section 2 of the Information Technology Act 2000. Therefore illegality has been committed for cheating the court.
Point No.8 Using as genuine a forged document (or) electronic record, who knows the reason to be a forged is an offence, Defined under section 471 of the IPC. Inserted and substituted by the Information Technology Act 2000 (21 of 2000) (w.e.f. 17.10.2000) Therefore illegality has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.9 Framing of an incorrect document to cause injury by public servant by disobeying the Law, charged with preparation (or) translation of any document (or) electronic record in a manner which he knows (or) believes to be incorrect is an offence, Defined under section 166 and 167 of the IPC. Therefore, illegality has been caused for cheating the court.
11) On 5th motion, both the cases jointed for symmetrical Trial, But he has been closed the case of suit on 08.06.2010. After receiving such notice and then given the back dated complaint petition under domestic violence Act 2005 to the District Social Welfare Officer. When the same relief of suit is pending before in the Civil Court.
12) On 6th motion, the District Social Welfare Officer, as well as Protection Officer both are intent to filed an incorrect records before in the Criminal Court, certified that the Protection Officer has been enquired for the complaint and made the Domestic Incident report in prescribed manner under this Act.
III. Phenomena Points for Fraudulent and illegality:
Point No.10 Same relief of two application cannot be filed in any two courts for getting two orders. Therefore fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.11 Any married woman cannot be filed any complaint under Domestic Violence Act 2005 against her husband in any criminal court, when the matrimonial dispute is pending before in the civil court, Further it would not be caused the criminality. Therefore fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.12 Without FIR (or) DIR, cannot be filed a criminal case under Domestic Violence Act 2005 in any criminal court. Therefore fraudulent has been caused for cheating the court.
Point No.13 The Domestic Incident Report. Defined under, section 9(b) of the Domestic Violence Act 2 important role defined under section 3 of this Act, about the function of Protection Officer as well as the Domestic Incident report are mandatory, not in optional. Therefore the District Social Welfare Officer as well as the Protection Officer has been caused the fraudulent for cheating the court.
Point No.14 It is the sincere duty of the protection officer to make out a Domestic Incident Report for Magistrate in prescribed manner and forward copies, There of to the local police station and to the service providers. Therefore it is an act of disobeying the law of illegality for cheating the court.
Point No.15 Public servant disobeying the Law, intent to cause injury to any person by framing an incorrect document is an offence defined under section 166 and 167 IPC Substituted by Information Technology Act 2000 (21 of 2000) (w.e.f. 17.10.2000). Therefore, both the public servant caused illegality for cheating the court.
Point No.16 No court to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation, Defined under section 468 (1) and (2) and section 469(1,a) of the Cr.Pc. Seem to be preponderance in view of the provision of Section 28 and 32 of the Act 2005, Read with Rule 15(6) of the Protection of woman from Domestic Violence Rule 2006. Which make the provision of Cr.Pc. Applicable and stand fortified by the Judgments of Honble Supreme Court in Janpani Sahoo Vs. Chandra Sekhar Mohantry, AIR 2007 SC 2762 and Noida Entrepreneurs Association Vs Noida & Ors., (2011) 6 SCC 508.
13) On 7th motion an impugned order has been issued by concealing the real fact of the case dated 07.04.2011.
14) On 8th motion, he has been endorsed as In view of oder in CMP 300/2010, on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Cuddalore, The suit may be dismissed as in fructuous.
15) On 9th motion, the suit has been dismissed on 22.06.2011. Such order has been concealed in the case file, Given only after filing a case under Right to Information Act 2005.
16) On 10th motion the HMOP 105/2009 has been ordered and pronounced on 13.10.2011 and again the order has been changed by pronouncing on 20.11.2011.
IV. Phenomena Points for Fraudulent and illegality:
Point No.17 The minor son would not be entitled for maintenance, when he attain the age of majority defined under section 20(1) of clause (d) cf the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2003, Which made the provision of Cr.P.C., applicable and stand fortified. Where as the order passed the magistrate dated 07.04.2011. He attain the age of majority as per his date of birth is 25.07.1993. Therefore person gets an order/office by misrepresentation is an illegality. Defined under section 43 IPC.
Point No. 18 It is a seized legal proposition that where a person gets an order/office by making misrepresentation or playing fraud upon the competent authority, such order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as fraud unravels everything. Equity is always known to defend the law from crafty evasion and new subtleties invented to evade law. It is a trite that Fraud and Justice never dwell together. Fraud is an act of deliberate deception with a design to secure something, Which is otherwise not due. Fraud and deception are Synonymous, Fraud is an anathema to all equitable principles and any affair tainted with fraud cannot be perpetuated or saved by the application of any equitable doctrine. An act of fraud on court is always viewed seriously. Ordered by Honble Supreme Court of India vide. Meghmala & Ors. Vs. G. Narasimha Reddy & Ors. (2010) 8 sec. 383. Therefore, the said observations have been made by me only to decide the case, provided under section 482 Cr.Pc. Hence the Appeal shall be allowed. Whereas the first appeal is conformed without appearance of argument made by the respondent as well the counsel.
PRAYER If my appeal is succeeded, may graciously be pleased to:
(a) pass on order against the impugned judgment and order dated 07.04.2011 for set-aside.
(b) pass on order against the complaint no CMP 300/2010 pending before in the Magistrate Court No.II at Cuddalore and all other orders to be quashed.
(c) pass on order that this appellant has to be continue with other cases against the public servant, who has been committed fraudulent/illegality up on the court pass such other and further order or orders of this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
21. Before commencing his reply, Mr.Ravichander, learned counsel for the respondent-wife submitted that the wife is willing to give-up her claim of maintenance provided, she and children are permitted to stay in the shared household, which is in her name. Responding to the proposal, the petitioner submitted that though the property is registered in the name of the respondent-wife, construction has been made from his funds. Party-in-person submitted that he is not willing to accept the proposal, rather he would contest the case on merits.
22. Mr.Ravichander, learned counsel for the respondent denied the allegations of fraud, forgery, misrepresentation made against the wife-respondent. He further submitted that nowhere in the entire proceedings, right from the date of institution of the complaint, till final orders were passed in Crl.A.No.32 of 2011, dated 10.12.2012, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, the petitioner/husband has made any averments of fraud or forgery, alleged to have been committed by the respondent-wife or the officials. In this regard, no evidence was also adduced.
23. Learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that suit in O.S.No.319 of 2009, has been filed for an injunction. In the suit in I.A.No.1290 of 2009, was filed, on the file of learned Principal District Munsif, Cuddalore. For filing of the suit, presence of the party is not required. He further submitted that H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009, was filed on 18.09.2009, on the file of learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore. As presence of the party is not required for filing the suit, he submitted that the contention of the party-in-person that both in H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009 and O.S.No.319 of 2009, were filed in the open Court by the petitioner and thus, there were false applications prepared by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife, and fraud by the respondent, require to be rejected in limini.
24. On the submission that Ex.P3, document, viz., hospital records is forged, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that no such plea was taken up by the petitioner in the lower Court. There was no supporting evidence, either. On the contrary, he submitted that Ex.P3 is not forged.
25. Learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that the procedure contemplated under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, has been followed, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.2, Cuddalore, when he took the case on file. On the contention of the party-in-person that without any FIR/Domestic Violence Incident Report and that no case can be taken on file, he submitted that the same is liable to be rejected, in the light of the provision, under Section 12 of the Act.
26. Replying to the contention of the petitioner that the residence order granted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, was confusing and it is only in the nature of opinion, without clarity, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that while addressing the prayer of the respondent-wife, for a direction to handover the house to her, the Court below has only observed that it has no authority to pass such an order, ie., to grant the said relief, for a direction to handover or deliver possession. But having regard to the powers conferred on the Court, under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to grant residence order, an order has been granted to the wife and children, permitting them to reside in the share household, at Door No.2-S, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore. He therefore submitted that there is nothing confusing in the order of the Court.
27. Learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that filing of H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009 for divorce would not preclude the wife, from claiming maintenance, under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It is also his submission that a divorced wife is also entitled to maintenance in law.
28. As regards the contention that as on 07.04.2011, PW.2, has attained majority and therefore, the order, directing payment of maintenance to the children should be set aside, learned counsel for the respondent-wife submitted that the wife is not aggrieved over the denial of maintenance to her, for the reason that she is currently employed. As PW.2, son of the petitioner was born on 25.07.1993, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that son, examined as PW.2, has not attained majority, as on 07.04.2011, when the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.II, Cuddalore, passed an order, granting interim relief and hence, he is entitled to maintenance. Daughter is still a minor and therefore, wife is entitled to seek for maintenance to the children. He denied the contention that PW.2, Son, has committed an illegality by misrepresentation to the lower Court. For the abovesaid reasons, he prayed for dismissal of the present revision petition.
29. Heard Mr.Arul Prakasam, party-in-person and the learned counsel for the respondent.
30. On the aspect of contradictions in the evidence of PW.1 and PW.2 respectively, party-in-person, was directed to produce the copies of the testimonies of Pws.1 and 2. But, the entire records have been called for and perused by this Court.
31. Though the petitioner/husband has stated that there are contradictions of the evidence of Pws.1 and 2, perusal of the same, does not support his oral submissions. Extract of the relevant portion of the evidence of PW.2, Son, in the lower Court, is as follows:
1/ ehd; ,e;j tHf;fpy; kDjhuh; jug;g[ 2tJ rhl;rpahntd;. nkw;go kDjhuh; vdJ jha;. Mthh;/ vjph; kDjhuh; vdJ je;ijahthh;/ 2/ nkw;go tHf;fpd; tpguk; vdf;F ed;F bjhpa[k;/ nkw;go vjph; kDjhuuhfpa vdJ je;ij kDjhuuhfpa vdJ jhahhplKk;. VdJ j';if epntjhtplKk;. Vd;dplKk; xU ehSk; ghpt[lndh. ghrj;Jlndh ele;J bfhz;lJ ,y;iy/ rjh moj;J Jd;g[Wj;Jthh;/ Kul;Ljdj;Jld;jhd; ele;J bfhs;thh;/ vdJ je;ij (vjph; kDjhuh;) jdf;F vJ jtW vd;W bjhpfpwnjh mij ehd; bra;jhy; vd;id yj;jpahy; moj;J Jd;g[Wj;Jthh;/ ehd; typjh';f Koahky; fjWntd;/ ,jdhy;. vdf;F je;ij kPJ ghrk; tutpy;iy gak;jhd; te;jJ/ mtiuf;fz;lohny U:Kf;Fs; XotpLntd;. VdJ jhia bfhLikg;gLj;Jtjw;F msnt ,y;iy/ xU Kiw bfhjpf;Fk; PAN Ff;fiu vLj;J vd; jhapd; bjhilg;gFjpapy; moj;jhh;/ mjd; fhuzkhf vd; jhapd; bjhilg;gFjpapy; g[z; Vw;gl;L rpfpr;ir bgw;Wf;bfhz;lhh;/ gpd;g[ xUKiw vdJ jhia fd;dj;jpy; miwe;jij ehd; nehpy; ghh;j;njd;/ vdJ jha;f;F tha; nfhzyhfp rpfpr;ir vLj;Jf;bfhz;lhh;/ ,utpy; vdJ jhia tPl;il tpl;L btspapy; js;sp fjit g{l;o tpLthh;/ vdJ jhapd; rk;gsj;ijbay;yhk; vdJ je;ijna tw;g[Wj;jp th';fpf;bfhs;thh;/ 3/ vdf;F tptuk; bjhpe;jjpypUe;J vdJ je;ij v';fis btspapy; v';Fk; Tl;or;brd;wJ ,y;iy/ ghrKld; vJt[k; th';fpf;bfhLj;jJ ,y;iy/ vdJ jha; tHp ghl;ldhh;jhd; th';fpj;jUthh;/ vdf;F gs;spf;fl;lzk;. j';Fk; tpLjp fl;lzk; vy;yhk; vd; jha; jhd; brYj;jp te;jhh;/ vdf;F Jzpfs; vy;yhk; vd; jha; jhd; th';fpj;jUthh;/ vdnt. fdk; nfhh;l;lhh; mth;fs; vjph; kDjhuh; v';fis ,dpnky; Jd;g[Wj;jhky; ,Uf;ft[k;. vdf;Fk;. VdJ j';if epntjht[f;Fk;. Vjph;fhy cah;fy;tp gog;g[f;fhf epthuzk; tH';fp vjph; kDjhuUf;F cj;jutpl ntz;Lk;bkd;Wk; vdJ jha; bgahpy; cs;s tPl;il (je;ij trKs;s) eh';fs; FoapUf;f cj;jutpl ntz;Lkha; kDjhuh; rhh;ghf gpuhj;jpf;fpd;nwd;/
32. Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, deals with the application to the Magistrate and the said Section is extracted hereunder:
(1) An aggrieved person or a Protection Officer or any other person on behalf of the aggrieved person may present an application to the Magistrate seeking one or more reliefs under this Act:
Provided that before passing any order on such application, the Magistrate shall take into consideration any domestic incident report received by him from the Protection Officer or the service provider.
(2) The relief sought for under sub-section (1) may include a relief for issuance of an order for payment of compensation or damages without prejudice to the right of such person to institute a suit for compensation or damages for the injuries caused by the acts of domestic violence committed by the respondent:
Provided that where a decree for any amount as compensation or damages has been passed by any Court in favour of the aggrieved person, the amount, if any, paid or payable in pursuance of the order made by the Magistrate under this Act shall be set off against the amount payable under such decree and the decree shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) or any other law for the time being in force, be executable for the balance amount, if any, left after such set off.
(3) Every application under sub-section (1) shall be in such form and contain such particulars as may be prescribed or as nearly as possible thereto.
(4) The Magistrate shall fix the first date of hearing which shall not ordinarily be beyond three days from the date of receipt of the application by the Court.
(5) The Magistrate shall endeavour to dispose of every application made under sub-section (1) within a period of sixty days from the date of its first hearing.
33. Every application of the aggrieved person under Section 12 shall be in Form II or as nearly as possible thereto. The aggrieved person may seek the assistance of the Protection Officer in preparing her application and forwarding the same to the concerned Magistrate.
34. In Milan Kumar Singh v. State of U.P., reported in 2007 Crl.L.J. 4742, the Allahabad High Court held that a plain reading of the Section 12 of the Act, shows that an aggrieved person can file an application, directly to the Magistrate concerned. This is the choice of the aggrieved person that instead of directly approaching the Magistrate, he or she can approach the Protection Officer and in case of emergency, the service provider and with their help to the Magistrate concerned. The word "or" used in Section 12 is very material, which provides a choice to the aggrieved person to approach in the aforesaid manner. There is no illegality in directly approaching the Magistrate for taking cognizance in the matter. It is for the Magistrate concerned to take help of Protection Officer and service provider, that after receiving the complaint provided, he feels it necessary for final disposal of the dispute between the parties. If the parties concerned or the Magistrate takes the help of the Protection Officer, he would submit a Domestic Incident Report to the Magistrate concerned.
35. In Ajay Kant v. Alka Sharma reported in 2008 Cr.L.J. 264, a Gwalior Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court held that it was obligatory on the Magistrate to take into consideration the report of Protection Officer, before passing an order, on the application and not before issuance of notice to petitioners. The Court held that the proceeding initiated under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, cannot be quashed on the ground that no report from the Protection Officer under Section 12 had been called for, before the issuance of notice. The Hon'ble Bench has further held that the application under Section 12 was an application and not a complaint. Recording of statements by the Magistrate, as provided for under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr. P.C. before issuance of any notice, was not necessary.
36. In Baldev Raj Gagneja v. Neha Gagneja reported in AIR 2010 (NOC) 689, the Hon'ble Uttaranchal High Court held that the aggrieved person could directly approach Magistrate or can approach the Protection Officer, in case of emergency, a service provider and with their help to Magistrate concerned, can proceed further. The said Court held that there was no illegality in directly approaching the Magistrate for taking cognizance in the matter. It is further held that the Magistrate concerned can take help of the Protection Officer and the service provider, after receiving complaint provided. In the above reported case, it has been further held that the submission of a Domestic Violence Incident Report in Form 1 is only procedural in nature. If the Protection Officer failed to submit his report, strictly as per Rule 5 in Form 1, then, it is always open to the Magistrate, to call for a further report from the Protection Officer in form 1. The Court held that such procedural error committed by the Protection Officer, in submitting report, should not be made as a ground to reject application.
37. In Swarup Mandal v. State of Jharkhand reported in 2011 (108) AIC 827, the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court has held that it is not imperative for the Magistrate to call for a domestic incident report from the Protection Officer or the service provider. But if the protection officer or service provider had suo motu submitted a report, the Magistrates has to take the same into consideration before passing an order for maintenance etc., under Section 12 of the Act. In the reported case, though there was no report from the Protection Officer, the Court held that the orders passed by the Courts below, cannot be challenged, on ground of non-consideration of the report filed by the Protection Officer.
38. In Basit (Md.) v. State of Assam reported in I (2012) DMC 774 (Gau.) = 2011 (106) AIC 864 at 864 (Gau.), the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court held that it is not obligatory for the Magistrate, either to call for a report from the Protection Officer or the Service Provider, at the stage of taking cognizance of a complaint. The Court further held that if any such report was available, before the Magistrate, the same should be taken into consideration. The Court held that there was no infirmity or illegality, in taking cognizance of the complaint.
39. In the above reported case, it has been further held that under Section 12 of the Act, a complaint could be filed before a Magistrate either, by the aggrieved person or by a Protection Officer. It is not necessary that such a complaint should be accompanied with a report of Protection Officer. Only when a report from a Protection Officer was available, the same shall have to be taken into consideration. The Hon'ble Court has held that Section 12 does not deal with passing of final orders. But final orders are passed only under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Act. The Hon'ble Court has held that Section 12 is akin to Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 12 of the Act, only contemplates, as to who can file a complaint, as to what reliefs can be sought for, what should be the contents of the complaint and how the complaint should be examined thereafter. The Hon'ble Court has further held that if these preconditions are satisfied, the concerned Court can take cognizance of the complaint, subject to satisfying that a prima facie case has been made out, on facts. The Gauhati High Court has held that unlike Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there is no requirement of recording any preliminary statement of the aggrieved person, for filing a complaint under Section 12 of the D.V. Act, for the purpose of taking cognizance.
40. Reverting to the case on hand, one of the oral submissions made by Mr.Arul Prakasam, the party in person is that the learned counsel, who appeared for the wife, in the lower Courts, has prepared three types of false applications, the respondent-wife has committed fraud on the Court below and obtained interim orders of residence and maintenance. To support the above contentions, he has contended that H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009, on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore, for dissolution of marriage and suit in O.S.No.319 of 2009, on the file of the learned District Munsif, Cuddalore, for an injunction, could not have been filed by the respondent/wife, on 18.08.2009, in the open Court, as she cannot be omni present, in both the Courts and thus, according to him, both the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife, who prepared applications, which he had described as false and the respondent-wife, have committed fraud.
41. For filing a suit in the Court, presence of the party is not required. However, for filing H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009, for divorce, presence of the party may be required. Presentation of the suit is not done in the Open Court. So also, presentation of H.M.O.P., is not done in thhe open Court. Normally, presentation of H.M.O.P., is done in the Registry, where the identity of the party, would be verified. Without even verifying the procedure followed by the Courts, in the matter of presentation of a suit and presentation of H.M.O.P., for divorce, Mr.Arul Prakasam, party-in-person, has made a bald and unnecessary allegation against the learned counsel, who is stated to have prepared the pleadings in the suit in O.S.No.319 of 2009 and H.M.O.P.No.105 of 2009.
42. In the counter affidavit filed by the Husband/revision petitioner, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore, there is absolutely no allegation of fraud, alleged to have been played by the respondent, or the officials. After suffering residence and maintenance orders, the revision petitioner has filed an appeal in C.A.No.32 of 2011, dated 10.12.2011, before the learned Sessions Judge, Cuddalore District. In the grounds of appeal, the petitioner has stated as follows:
(i) The order of the lower Court is against law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case.
(ii) The trial Court is erred in arriving at a conclusion in favour of the respondent without any reason.
(iii) The trial Court ought to have taken into consideration the legal lacuna of not marking the Domestic Incident Report.
(iv) The trial Court has erred in observing the glaring discrepancies between the evidence of Pws.1 and 2.
(v) Hence the order of the trial Court is liable to be set aside.
(vi) Under these circumstances, the appellant prays to set aside the trial Court order by allowing this appeal.
43. Even in the memorandum of grounds of revision filed in this Court, no ground has been raised, on the aspect of fraud, alleged to have been committed by the respondent, in the matter of preparation of any application, by the learned counsel for the respondent. Official acts of the District Protection Officer or the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore, in forwarding the Domestic Violence Incident Report, cannot be attributed with any motive, such as, fraud and dishonesty. Party-in-person has not taken any effort to adduce evidence, even to substantiate fraud, against the respondent or the officials. It is well settled that in any proceedings before the Court of law, fraud has to be pleaded and proved. In the case on hand, the petitioner has not even whispered about fraud, both in the lower Courts and also before this Court.
44. Submission made by the party-in-person is that Ex.P3 is a O.P.Chit. But as per the lower Court records, Ex.P3, is the Discharge summary issued by Krishna Hospital, Cuddalore for taking treatment, for the injuries, allegedly caused by the husband to the respondent/wife. The petitioner has submitted that the alleged treatment is fraud. It is also his contention that the letter of the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore District, is forged. Thus, according to him, both the documents, are forged. Filling of such documents and using the same as genuine in the Court, constitute offences, under Sections 466 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and thus, the respondent has committed fraud and obtained orders, from the lower Courts.
45. Perusal of the records, Pages 1 to 54 of the Lower Court Records, reveals that on the information from the respondent-wife, the District Protection Officer, under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, had visited the spot and made a Domestic Violence Incident Report. The said Officer has recorded the statements and submitted a report. Thereafter, the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District, vide R.O.C.No.474/A4/08, dated 08.01.2010, addressed a letter to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, to take the case on file, under Section 200 Cr.P.C., read with Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. In the said letter, both the District Protection Officer, Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Cuddalore and District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore, have signed. At this juncture, this Court deems it fit to extract the letter, dated 08.01.2010, as follows:
From To Tmt.R.Bhuvaneshwari, M.A. M.Ed., The Magistrate, District Social Welfare Officer, Judicial Magistrate-II Cuddalore, Cuddalore District. Cuddalore. R.O.C.No.4774/A4/08, dated 08.01.2010 Sub: Complaint of Tmt.Vijayalakshmi, W/o.Arul (Husband), U/s.12 of Protection of Woken from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, at Report of the Protection Officer Reg.
A copy of the complaint preferred by one Tmt.Vijayalakshmi, W/o.Arul, against Mr.Arul (Husband). As a Protection Officer, enquire for the complaints against Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at No.2/5, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore-1, into the matter on spot and make a Domestic Incident Report, enclosed herewith. Please complaint filed under Section 200 Cr.P.C., read with Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
I. Details of the Complaint:
(1) Name of the Complaint : Tmt.A.Vijayalakshmi (2) Age of the Complaint : 42 (3) Address of the Complaint : 2/5, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Cuddalore.
II. Details of the Respondents:
Sl.No. Name Relationship Address 1 Mr.Arul Husband No.2/5, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore-1.
Encl: 1. Clients Petitions
2. Domestic Incident Report Sd/- Sd/-
District Protection Officer District Social Welfare Officer, Domestic Violence Act 2005 Cuddalore.
Cuddalore.
46. This Court has perused the details of the domestic violence, alleged to have been reported to the District Protection Officer. The Protection Officer has recorded that on various dates, from 03.04.2001, till the enquiry was conducted, there were acts of domestic violence. The details of the alleged domestic violence, evidence tendered, are extracted hereunder:
FORM 1 gotk; = 1 (tpjpfs; 5(1) kw;Wk; (2) kw;Wk; (3) ghh;f;f) FLk;g td;KiwapypUe;J bgz;fis ghJfhf;Fk; rl;lk; 2005 (43/2005) ,d; gphpt[ 9(b) kw;Wk; 37(2)(c) go Flk;g epfH;t[ mwpf;if 1/ ghjpf;fg;gl;l efh; - g[fhh; jUk; egh; gw;wpa tpgu';fs;
1/ g[fhh; jUgth;. Ghjpf;fg;gl;l eghpd; bgah; : tp$ayl;Rkp
2/ taJ : 45
3. gfph;e;Jbfhs;sg;gl;l tPl;od; tpyhrk; : 2-5. jdyl;Rkp efh;. flY}h;
FLk;gkhf thH;e;j ,lj;jpd; tpyhrk;
4/ bjhiyngrp vz;/ (,Ug;gpd;) : 9600596893
2/ vjph; KiwaPl;lhsh; gw;wpa tptu';fs;:
t/ vz;/
bgah;
ghjpf;fg;gl;l tUf;F vd;d cwt[ Kiw
tpyhrk;
bjhiyngrp
vz;/
(,Ug;gpd;)
1.
K.mUs;
fzth;
No.2/5, jdyl;Rkp efh;. neUefh;. FlY}h;/
9486659258
3/ ghjpf;fg;gl;lthpd; FHe;ijfs; gw;wpa tptu';fs; (,Ug;gpd;) :
a) bkhj;j FHe;ijfspd; vz;zpf;if : 2
b) tptu';fs; :
bgah;
taJ
ghypdk;
jw;nghJ ahUld; FoapUf;fpwhh;
A.Mb$a;gpufhc;&
17
Mz;
jhahUld;
A.epntjh
12
bgz;
jhahUld;
4/ FLk;g td;Kiw epfH;t[fs; :
t/ vz;
td;Kiw ele;j njjp. ,lk;. neuk;
FLk;g td;Kiw g[hpe;jth;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik cly; hPjpahd td;Kiw ntw tifahd jhf;fjy; jat[ bra;J fwpg;gpLf Fwpg;g[fs;
tpgu';fs;mtpy; ,izf;fg;gl;Ls;sd/ tpgu';fs; m tpy; ,izf;fg;gl;Ls;sd/ tpgu';fs; m tpy; ,izf;fg;gl;Ls;sd/ tpgu';fs; mtpy; ,izf;fg;gl;Ls;sd/ FLk;g td;Kiw epfH;t[fs; ,izg;g[ *m* t/ vz;
njjp ,lk;
neuk;
FLk;g td;Kiw g[hpe;jth;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik Fwpg;g[
1. 3.4.2001 2/5, neU efh; 1. flY}h;
8/30 ,ut[ K.mUs;
Pan Ff;fhpy; bfhjpf;Fk; rhjk; cs;ns ,Uf;Fk;nghJ mij mg;gona vLj;J bjhilapy; moj;jhh;/ Saff Nurse nuQqfhtplk; rpfpr;ir bgwg;gl;lJ jPf;fhak; (nehpy;
ghh;j;jJ FHe;ijfs;.
bgw;nwhh;. j';iffs;
rhl;rp
2. 2004 Kjy; 2008 tiu vz;/2/-5. jdyl;rkp efh;. neU efh;. flY}h;/
-
K.mUs;
neuo kpd; ,izg;gpid mspj;J mjd; K:yk; kpd; mjph;r;rpia Fsph;rhjdg;bgl;o. fpiuz;lh;. Heatery; Vw;gLj;jpdhh;/ ,jdhy; Main Switch Board jPg;gw;wp vhpe;jjhy; g[jpa Sub Meter khw;wpa tpguk; ,izg;g[
3. 25.02.2006 vz;/2/-5. jdyl;rkp efh;. neU efh;. flY}h;/
-
K.mUs;
moj;J Jd;g[Wj;jp = Kfj;jpy; miwe;J = tha; nfhzpaJ = 1 khj fhyk; Shock Treatment vLj;jJ = kd cisr;riy cz;lhf;fpdhh;
kUj;Jt rhd;W ,izg;g[ 1
4. 15.05.2009 Vz;/5. L.I.G., mz;zh efh;. flY}h;/
-
K.mUs;
tPL g[Fe;J bghUl;fis btspna tPrp. cilj;jJ mg;gh jpU/T.K.,e;jpu nfhghy fpUc;&zida[k;. vd;ida[k; moj;jJ. Vd; gs;sp rhd;wpjH;fis fpHpf;f Kd;te;J bfhiy kpul;ly; tpLtpj;jhh;. Mjd; gpd;dUk; gyKiw cwtpdh;fSld; te;J bfhiy kpul;ly; tpLj;jhh;/ midj;J kfsph; fhtypy; g[fhh; (8/6/2009) nfrl;oy; gjpt[ ,izg;g[ 2
5. 07.06.2009 vz;/5. L.I.G., mz;zh efh;. flY}h;/
-
K.bry;tuh$;
(jikad;) K/rnuh$h (mf;fh) mz;zd; K/bry;tuh$;. mf;fh K/rnuh$h vd;id tPL g[Fe;J moj;jhh;/ tPl;ow;F tUk;go bfhiy kpul;ly; = midj;J kfsph; fhty; epiyaj;jpy; g[fhh; mspj;njd; = tprhuizapd; gpd;dh; uhQqt rPUilapy; tPl;ow;F te;J tpLjiyg;gj;jpuj;jpy; ifbaGj;J nfl;Lk;. tPl;ow;F tUk;goa[k;. kpul;otpl;L FoapUf;Fk; tPl;od; rhtpiaa[k; bjhpahky; bfhz;L brd;whh;/
6. gyKiw vz;/5. L.I.G., mz;zh efh;. flY}h;/ fhiy khiy ,ut[ K.mUs;
kfid vg;nghJk; je;ij K/mUSf;F gpof;fhJ/ vg;nghJk; mtid moj;J Jd;g[Wj;jpf; bfhz;nl ,Ug;ghh;/ mog;gjw;bfd;nw fhtyh;fs; gad;gLj;Jk; yj;jpia gad;gLj;jp fl;oypy; fhiya[k;. iffis jiyapYk; Cd;w br;aJ mtid Fg;g[w ftpH;j;jp cl;fhUk; ,lj;jpy; mog;gnj mth; gzp/ ,J rpW tajpypUe;J fz;K:oj;jdkhf mog;gjhy; mtDf;F ,d;dKk; gLf;ifapy; rpWePh; fHpf;Fk; gHf;fKk;. kpf. Kpf gae;j Rghtk; cilatdhft[k;. xU Kiw ,th; mo jh';fhky; tPl;il tpL;L btspnawpa[k; ,Uf;fpwhd;/ kfs;. kfd;. vd; bgw;nwhh; rhl;rp t/vz;/ (1) ghypay; td;Kiw bghUj;jkhd ,lj;jpy; (FwpapLf)
1.
2.
3.
4. ~ tYf;fl;lhakhf ghyapy; clYwt[ ~ ghypay; tf;fpukhd gl';fs; my;yJ ~ gpwiu kfpHtpf;Fk;go c';fis gad;gLj;Jjy;
~ gpw. Ghypay; hPjpahd jpl;Ljy;.
Mtkhdg;gLj;Jjy;
cjhrPdg;gLj;Jjy; my;yJ c';fs; fz;zpaj;ij Fiwf;Fk;goahd bra;iffs;
(Fwpg;ghf fPnH cs;s gFjpapy;
tpsf;fk; jUf) 1/ ghypay; td;Kiw t/ vz;
njjp ,lk;
neuk;
ghypay; td;Kiw g[hpe;jth;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik Fwpg;g[
1. gpw 1997 Kjy; 2009 Mz;Lfs; tiu 38/4, g[Jf;Fg;gk;.
flY}h;/ 2-5. jdyl;Rkp efh;. flY}h;
,ut[ K.mUs;
kpf. kpf mWbtWf;fj;jf;f thh;j;ijfisf; TWtJ. Foj;J tpl;L vd; gLf;iffis thry; fjt[f;F btspna tPrp ,ut[ KGtJk; vd;id btspna epwf itg;gJ. Vd; ,g;go bra;fpd;wPh;fs; vd;why; cdf;F /////////////////// vGjnt ja';Fk; thh;j;ijfshy; vd;id fhag;gLj;JtJ. tsh;e;j gps;isfs; kj;jpapy; vd;id thh;j;ijahy; fhag;gLj;JtJ kfs;. kfd; rhl;rp ii 14.8.2009 bghpag;gl;L fhiy K.mUs;
ehd; rhkpahh;ngl;ilapy; ntiy bra;tjhy; vd; tz;oia (Scooty) bghpagl;oy; cs;s rhapuhk; vd;gth; tPl;oy; tpl;L itg;ngd;/ mth; kidtpaplk; vd; kfd; vd; nky; Mir gLtjhf ,d;Dk; rpy mWbtWg;ghd tpc&a';fis Twpa[s;shh;/ xypg;gjpt[ ehlh gjpt[ rhl;rp iii 29.9.2009 vz;/5. L.I.G., mz;zh efh;. flY}h;/ kjpak;
K.mUs;
FLk;g ey tprhuiz md;W kjpak; mUs; mf;fh kfs; jpUkjp/U:gp mf!;oad; K:yk; te;j bjhiyngrp ciuahly; jd; khkh (K.mUs;) ,y;yw thH;tpy; <Lgl KoahJ vd;W kUj;Jt rhd;wpjH; itj;jpUg;gjhf Twy; = (vd; elj;ij gps;isfs; gpwg;gpy; re;njfk;) xypg;gjpt[ ehlh gjpt[ rhl;rp t/vz;/ (2) thh;j;ij hPjpahd Jc;&gpunahfk; kw;Wk; cstpay; hPjpahd td;Kiw
1.
2.
3. ~ elj;ij gw;wpa mtJ}W ngRjy; my;yJ ed;dlj;ij gw;wpa re;njfk;
Vw;gLj;jpajhf ngRjy;
~ tujl;riz bfhz;Ltuhikf;F mtkhdg;gLj;Jjy;
~ FHe;ij bgw;bwLf;ftpy;iy vd mtkhdg;gLj;Jjy;
~ khpahij Fiwthf mrp';fg;gLj;Jk;
tifapy; Fwpg;gpLjy; my;yJ ngRjy;
~ mtkhdg;gLj;Jjy; gl;lag; bgah;
Nl;Ljy;
~ c';fs; gs;sp. fy;Y}hp (m) ntw fy;tp epWtd';fsf;F nghf tplhky; jLj;jy;
~ ntiyf;F nghftplhky; jLj;jy;
~ tPl;oypUe;J btspna nghf tplhky;
jLj;jy;
~ Fwpg;gpl;l egiu re;jpf;f tplhky;
jLj;jy;
~ c';fs; tpUg;gj;jpw;F khwhf jpUkzk;
bra;a fl;lhg;gLj;Jjy;
~ c';fs; njh;t[g;go xU egiu jpUkzk;
bra;Jf;bfhs;s tplhky; jLj;jy;
~ ,J jtpu thh;j;ij hPjpahd (m) cstpay; hPjpahf Jc&;gpunahfk; fPnH jug;gl;Ls;s ,lj;jpy; ,e;j Fwpg;gpl;l Jc;&gpunahfk; gw;wp Fwpg;gpLf 2/ thh;j;ijfs; hPjpahd Jc;&gpunahfk; kw;Wk; cstpay; hPjpahd td;Kiw t/ vz;/ njjp ,lk;
neuk;
FLk;g td;Kiw g[hpe;jth;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik Fwpg;g[ 1/ 1993 Kjy; 2009 tiu ve;neuKk;
bgw;nwhh;. Rnfhjhpfs; kw;Wk; vd; elj;ij gw;wpa jtwhd bra;jpfis Twy;
2/ 1993 Kjy; 2009 tiu ve;neuKk;
K:d;W gt[d; nghl;L jd; jiyapy; vd;id fl;otpl;ljhf vdf;F nghdhy; nghfpwJ vd;W thH;fif bfhLj;jjhft[k; Twpf;bfhz;nl ,Ug;ghh;/ 3 vd; rk;gsg;gzk; midj;ija[k; vLj;Jf; bfhs;Sjy;. Busf;Tl gzk; bfhLg;gJ ,y;iy/ FLk;g brytpw;fhf ,d;W tiu xU 100 U: Tl bfhLj;jJ ,y;iy/ gps;isfs; gog;g[ bryt[f;F. FLk;g bryt[ vd; gzj;jpnyna bryt[ = ,d;W tiu gps;isfSf;F Jzpfs; vLj;jJ fpilahJ ve;j ,e;Jf;fs; gz;oifa[k; bfhz;lhl tpl;lJ ,y;iy/ mg;go bfhz;lhLk; nghJ rz;il ,LtJ. btspapy; brd;W tpLtJ. tPL fpucwg;gpuntrj;jpd; gj;jphpf;ifapy; bgz; bgaiu kl;Lk; nghl;lJ/(epntjh) vd;Dila ntiy = gzpaplk; ,y;iy kfd; bgah; Fwpg;gplhjJ = ntiyf;F bry;Yk; jpkph; rk;gsk; th';Fk; jpkph; nghd;w ,d;Dk; brhw;fshy; jpdk; jpdk; rpj;utij/ jpUkzkhd 16 Mz;Lfspy; ,d;W tiu vd;id bgah; brhy;yp miHj;jJ ,y;iy/ jpUkzk; Md g[jpjpnyna Tlnt tUk; nghJ mg;gona vd;id tpl;L tpl;L ngha;tpLthh;/ ,e;j rk;gtk; gyKiw Vw;gl;l fhuzj;jhy; ,tUld; btspa{h; (xd;wpuz;L) jtpu brd;wJ ,y;iy/ t/ vz;/ njjp ,lk;
neuk;
FLk;g td;Kiw g[hpe;jth;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik Fwpg;g[ 4/ 8/02/2009 2-5. jdyl;Rkp efh;. flY}h;
tPl;oy; vd; g';F ghfj;ij gphpj;J tUk;go tPl;iltpl;L Juj;jpaJ. Vdf;F te;j tphpt[iuahsh; neh;fhziy nghftplhky; jLj;jJ = vd; Fixed Deposity; vd; je;ij nghl;l gzk; nghjtpy;iy mjpfk; nghLk;go tw;g[Wj;jpaJ F.D. Xerox ,izg;g[ = 3 5/ mjpfg;goahd td;brhw;fs; = btspna brhy;y ,ayhj Jh; eltof;if = ,J ehd; ghh;f;Fk; ntiy. gog;g[. FLk;g ft[utk;. gps;isfspd; vjph;fhyk;. Mf;fk; gf;fk; ,f;fhuz';fis kdjpy; itj;J kpf kpf bghWikahf ,J ehs; tiu mtUld; thH;e;J te;njd;/ vd;Dila epiyf;fhf mthplk; nfl;gth;fs; ahUk; ,y;iy/ mk;kh vdf;fhf ntz;o jpUg;gjpapy; bkhl;il nghl;lhh;/ vd;d fhuzk; c';fSf;Fs; gpur;rid vd;W mikjpahf nfl;f te;j mg;ghit mtkhdg;gLj;jplaJ ,d;Dk; 16 Mz;Lfspy; vj;jidnah epfH;r;rpfs; vd;id kd cisr;rYf;F Mshf;fp Mental Deprationf;F cs;shf;fp gyKiw gs;spapy; kaf;fk;. Fits te;js;sJ/ Doctor Certificate vj;jidnah cs;sJ/ gps;isfs; eLtpy; vd;id ghlk; elj;jtplhky; ,th; Twk; fLk; brhw;fs; epidt[f;F te;J kaf;fk; tpGe;j ehl;fs; gy/ vj;jidnah vj;jidnah ehd;gl;l mtkhdk; mGj ,kut[fs; fzf;fpy; ml';fhjit/ ,J kpf kpf rj;jpakhd cz;ik/ gyKiw kd cisr;ry; fhuzkhf jw;bfhiyf;F ehd; mtuhy; J}z;lg;gl;L vd;Dila gps;isfSf;fhf ehd; eil gpzkhf thH;e;J te;njd;/ xU jz;lid Fw;wthspf;F Tl jhd; bra;j ,d;d jtWf;hf ,e;j jz;lid vd;W bjhpa[k;/ Mdhy; ehd; vd;d fhuzj;jpw;fhf ,t;thW 16 Mz;Lfshf Jd;g[Wj;jg;gLfpnwd; vd;w nfs;tpf;F tpilna ,y;iy/ xU fztdplk; ,Ue;j fpilf;f ntz;oa md;g[. mutizg;g[. ghJfhg;g[. bghUshjhu cjtp (gps;isfSf;Fk; md;g[ fhl;ltpy;iy) ve;j tpjkhd flika[k; ,d;wp vd;Dila gzj;jpw;fhft[k;. rK:fj;jpy; mth; me;j!;Jf;F xU FLk;gk; vd;fpd;w fzf;fpw;Fk; me;j nghh;itapy; mth; bra;j mj;jid xGf;f nflhd tpc&a';fSf;Fk; kidtp vd;fpd;w ehd; njitg;gl;oUf;fpnwd;/ ,e;j kd cisr;rYf;F jz;lid fz;og;ghf ,istdpd; nfhh;l;oy; mtDf;F fpilf;Fk;/ 6/ gzpg[hpa[k; ,lj;jpy; jiyik Mrphpahplk; fl;rp Ml;fs; K:ykhf gs;spapy; gtrhaj;Jngr fl;lhag;gLj;jpajhy; cld; gzpahw;Wk; Mrphpah;fsplk; vd;id gw;wpa juf;Fiwthd mtJ}uhd thh;j;ijfis Twp mtkhdg;gLj;jpdhh;
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12(3 bghUshjhu td;Kiw) c';fisa[k;/ c';fsJ FHe;ijfisa[k; guhkhpf;f gzk; ju kWj;jy;/ czt[/ cil/ kUe;J nghd;wtw;iw c';fSf;Fk;/ c';fs; FHe;ijfSf;Fk; ju kWj;jy;.
eP';fs; FoapUf;Fk; tPl;oypUe;J btspnaWk; go fl;lhag;gLj;Jjy;/ c';fs; tPl;od; xU gFjpf;F bry;ytplhky; bra;tJ (m) gad;gLj;jf;TlhJ vd jLg;gJ.
c';fs; bjhHpiy ftdpf;f tplhky; jil Vw;gLj;Jjy; (m) jLj;jy;
c';fis ntiyf;F bry;y mDkjpf;fhjpUj;jy;.
tPl;oy; cs;s bghJthd bghUl;fis (m) Jzpkzpfs; Mfpatw;iw gad;gLj;j tplhky; jLj;jy;.
c';fSila rPjd bghUl;fis c';fSf;F bjhpahky; (m) c';fs; mDkjp bgwhky; tpw;gJ(m) mlF itg;gJ.
c';fs; jpdf;Typ/ tUkhdk; my;yJ rk;gsj;ij tYf;fl;lhakhf mgfhpj;jy;.
c';fs; rPjd bghUl;fis ,y;yhky;; bra;jy; (m) bfhLj;J tpLjy;.
kpd;rhuk;_nghd; tPl;od; cgnahfj;jpw;fhd fl;lz';fis fl;lhky; ,Uj;jy;/ ,it jtpu ntW bghUshjhu td;Kiwfs; (fPnH tplg;gl;l ,lj;jpy; vd;d vd;gjid Fwpg;gpLf).
3/ bghUshjhu td;Kiw t/ vz;.
ehs;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik
1. fle;j 15 Mz;Lfshf FLk;g bryt[f;F gzk; bfhLj;jJ ,y;iy/ Fees/ Policy fl;oaJ ,y;iy. ehd; fl;oa ReceiptI mth; vLj;Jf;bfhz;lhh;. Midj;J Mtz';fisa[k;. gpy;iya[k; jd; trk; itj;Jf; bfhz;L tPl;il tpl;L vd;id btspnaw;wptpl;lhh;. Jhd; bra;j bryt[ nghy; jw;nghJ nghyp Mtz';fis jahhpj;J tpl;lhh;.
2. 22.5.2009 md;W Vw;gl;l cly; eyf;Fiwt[/ gps;isfSf;F Vw;gl;l (8.2.2009 ypUe;J) cly;eyf;Fiwit ehnd ftdpj;njd;(ECHS Smart card gps;isfSf;fhd/vd;Dila kUj;Jt fhh;il jd;trnk itj;Jf;bfhz;lhh;).
38.2.2009 gpg;hpthp 2009-ypUe;J vd;ida[k; vd; gps;isfisa[k; tPl;il tpl;L Juj;jptpl;L vd;Dila tPl;L rhtpa[k; vLj;J brd;whh;. g[lit/ gps;isfis Uniforms, Dress kw;Wk; midj;Jg; bghUs;fiska[k; tPl;Lf;Fs; itj;J g{l;of; bfhz;lhh;. vd; rPjdg; bghUl;fs;/ ehd; th';fpa bghUs;fs; midj;ija[k; g{l;o itj;Jtpl;lhh;/ (rhg;gpl jl;L/ Milfs;/ g[lit/ nghh;itfs;/ mj;jpahtrpag; bghUl;fs; midj;Jk; cwtpdh;fs; kw;Wk; ez;gh;fs; bfhLj;J cjtp cs;shh;fs;).
4. 22.5.2009 vd;id tPl;oypUe;J fl;lhakhf btspnaw;wp tPl;Lf;Fs; xU $hjp eha;/ btspna xU eha; kw;Wk; g{l;il khw;wp g{l;otpl;lhh;. tPl;ow;F gof;Fk; g[j;jfk; vLf;f te;j gps;isia (kfid) ehia tpl;L fof;fr; bra;jhh;. Vd;Dila nrkpg;g[/ 15 gt[d; eif tpw;W Loany; fl;oa vd; tPl;oy; ,Ue;J vd;ida[k;/ vd; gps;isfisa[k; khw;W Jzp Tl ,y;yhky; Juj;jptpl;lhh;. fle;j 10 khj fhykhf bgw;nwhUld;/ FHe;ijfSld; jdpna bgw;nwhUld; L.I.G, No:5, mz;zh efhpy; thlif tPl;oy; trpj:J tUfpd;nwd;. vdf;F ghJfhg;g[ mspj;j j';ifia/ bgw;nwhiu juf;Fiwthd thh;j;ijahy; v';fs; cwtpdh;fsplk; ngrp tUfpwhh;. Brtpypah; gzpg[hpa[k j';ifapd; gzp,lk; brd;W ,utpy; Foj;Jtpl;L gzp kpul;ly; bra;tJk;/ Efh;nthh; rhh;gpy; nehl;O!; tpLtJk; nghd;w bjhy;iyfs; mspj:J tUfpwhh;.;
5. tPl;od; thpia fl;lhky; ntz;Lbkd;nw tpl:Ltpl;lhh;. vd;Dila tUkhdk;/ ,ju gofs;/ D.A, Pay Arrier, Surrender, njh;t[ gzp bjhif/ tpilj;jhs; bjhif midj;ija[k; cz;oay; gzk; (rPl;L fl;oa) gzk; midj;ija[k; tPL fl;Lk; gzpf;F Alteration f;F tYf;fl;lhakhf gwpj;Jf; bfhz;L Ml;fs; ,y;yhky; mtnu fl;Lkhd gzp bra;J VjhtJ xU bgha; fzf;if Twp kPjp gzj;ij jd; bryt[f;F itj;Jf; bfhs;thh;. 07.11.1994 tiu rk;ghjpj;j midj;J tUkhdKk; o.V.mhpah;/ RD Savings, ruz;lh; kw;Wk; gpw bjhiffs; midj;Jk; tPl;ow;nf bryt[ bra;jhh;/
1.
2.
3. (4) tujl;riz rk;ke;jg;gl;l td;Kiwfs;
tujl;riz nfhhpf;iffs; vd;d vd;gij Fwpg;gpLf.
tujl;riz rk;ke;jg;gl;l ntW jfty;fs; jat[ bra;J Fwpg;gpLf. tujl;riz bghUl;fs; rPh;thpirg; bghUl;fs; gl;oay; ,j;Jld; ;,izf;fg;gl;Ls;sjh.
Mk;
,y;iy.
gpw FLk;g td;Kiwfs; c';fSf;F vjpuhfnth my;yJ c';fs; FHe;ijfSf;F vjpuhfnth ,iHf;fg;gl;oUg;gpd; tptu';fs;
4. tujl;riz rk;ke;jg;gl;l td;Kiw t.vz;
ehs;
td;Kiwapd; jd;ik je;ij tPl;il ghfk; gphpf;fg;gl;l nghJ vd; bgahpy; nghlg;gl;l U:.2/00/000_-I ifapy; nfl;lJ/ epykhf/ tPlhf g';F gphpj;J tUk;go fl;lhag;gLj;jpaJ/ ifbaGj;J (m) ,lJ if bgUtpuy;
g[fhh;jhuh;_ghjpf;fg;gl;l egh;
,izf;fg;gl;Ls;s Mtz';fs; gl;oay;
Mtzj;jpd; bgah;
njjp gpw tptu';fs;
kUj;Jt-(rl;l)rhd;wpjH;
ghf;f 1/ 2/ 3 kUj;Jthpd; rhd;wpjH; (m) kUj;Jt rPl;L ,izg;g[ M1/2/3/4 rPjdg; bghUl;fs; gl;oay;
1/ 2 ,d;d gpw Mtz';fs;
1/2/3/4 gotk; --2 (tpjp 6(1) ghh;f;f) FLk;g td;KiwapypUe;J bgz;fis ghJfhf;Fk; rl;lk; 2005/,d; gphpt[ 12 ePjpkd;w eLtUf;F kD bgWjy;
ePjpkd;w eLth;/ Fw;wtpay; eLth; ePjpkd;wk; No.II, flY}h;.
FLk;g td;KiwapypUe;J bgz;fis ghJfhf;Fk; rl;lk; 2005(43 of 2005) gphpt[ 12 fPH; jhf;fy; bra;a[k; ;kD.
1.FLk;g td;KiwapypUe;J bgz;fis ghJfhf;Fk; rl;lk; 2005 gphpt[ 18/ 19/ 20/ 21/ 22 fPH; jhf;fy; bra;a[k; kD fPH;fz;l eguhy; Flk;g epfH;t[ mwpf;ifa[ld; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gLfpwJ.
a) ghjpf;fg;gl;l egh; (Tick)
b) ghJfhg;g[ mYtyh;
c) ghjpf;fg;gl;lthpd; rhh;gpy; ntW egh;
(bghUj;jkhd ,lj;jpy; (Tick) Fwpg;gpLf)
2. ,e;j khz;g[kpF ePjpkd;wk;; ,e;j g[fhh;_ Flk;g epfH;t[ mwpf;ifia nfhg;gpy; vLj;Jf;bfhz;L fPH;fz;l nfhhpf;if _ my;yJ nfhhpf;iffis ,t;tHf;F NH;epiyf;f jf;f cj;jput[fis gpwg;gpf;FkhW gzpe;J nfhug;gLfpwJ.
a) gphpt[ 18-,d; go ghJfhg;g[ cj;jut[ kw;Wk; _ my;yJ
b) gphpt[ 19-,d; go trpg;gpl cj;jut[ kw;Wk; _ my;yJ
c) gphpt[ 20-,d; go vjph; KiwaPl;lhsiu cj;jut[ kw;Wk; _ my;yJ mspf;Fk;go cj;juit kw;Wk; _ my;yJ)
d) gphpt[ 21-,d;goahd cj;jut[ kw;Wk; _ my;yJ
e) gphpt[ 22-,d; go vjph;KiwaPl;lhsiu ,Hg;gPL tH';Fk;go cj;jut[ kw;Wk; _ my;yJ
f) nkw;Twpa nfhhpf;iffSf;F ePjpkd;wk; jf;fjhf fUJk; ,i;lf;fhy cj;jut[.
g) nkw;go nfhhpf;iffis jtpu ePjpkd;w ,t;tHf;F NHYf;F jf;fbjd fUJk; ve;j cj;jut[k; tH';Fk;go nfhug;gLfpwJ.
2. nfhug;gLk; cj;jut[fs;
i) gphpt[ 18-,d; fPH; ghJfhg;g[ cj;jut[ (Tick),k;kDtpd; thpir vz;.4(a) / (b) / (c) / (d) / (e) / (f) / (g)) ,y;
Twg;gl;Ls;s ve;j td;braiya[k;; kPz;Lk; bra;af;TlhJ vd;W; vjph; KiwaPl;lhsUf;F cWj;Jf;fl;lis.
(Tick) vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; gs;sp_ fy;Y}hp_ gzp bra;a[k; ,l';fSf;F tUtij jil bra;a[k;go.
(Tick) vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; j';fis gzp bra;a[k; ,lj;jpy; nghftplhky; bra;tij jil bra;a[k;go.
(Tick) vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; c';fs; FHe;ijfs; gof;Fk; gs;sp_fy;Y}hp FHe;ijfs; bry;Yk; ;gpw ve;j ,lj;jpy; bry;tjw;F jiltpjpf;Fk; go.
(Tick) vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh;c';fis gs;spf;F bry;tij jLg;gij jil tpjpf;Fk; go.
(Tick) vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; c';fis vt;tpjkhft[k; bjhlh;g[ bfhs;tij jil bra;a[k;go.
(Tick) vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; jdJ mira[k; kw;Wk; mirah brhj;J Kjyhd kjpg;g[ tha;e;j cilikfis tpw;gJ _ tpy;y';fgLj;Jtij jil bra;a[k;go Tl;lhd t';fp fzf;F kw;Wk; t';fp yhf;fh;fis gad;gLj;Jtij jil bra;a[k;go kw;Wk;; ghjpf;fg;gl;lth;fs; gad;gLj;j Vjthf cj;jutspf;Fk;go (Tick) ghjpf;fg;gl;lthpd; ghJfhg;gpy; cs;sth;fs; _ cwtpdh;fs;
kw;Wk; ntW egh;fspd; kPjhd td;Kiwia jil bra;tjw;fhf vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; mth;fis vt;tpjj;jpYk; mDFtij jil bra;a[k;go. ntW cj;jut[fs; njitg;god; Fwpg;ghf .........................
ii) gphpt[ 19 d;go trpg;gpl cj;jut[ vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh; fPH;f;fz;l bra;iffspypUe;J jil bra;jy; vd;id gfph;e;Jf; bfhs;sg;gl;l tPl;oypUe;J btspnaw;Wtij jil bra;jy;.
ehd; trpf;Fk; Fwpg;gpl;l gFjpf;Fs; gphpntrpg;gij jil bra;jy;
gfph;e:J bfhs;sg;gl;l trpg;gplj;jpy; jd;Dila chpikia Kw;wpYkhf tpl;L bfhLj;jiy jil bra;jy;
(Tick) ehd; bjhlh;e;J vd;Dila trpg;gplj;jpw;F bry;Ytij cj;juthj gLj;jpf;bfhs;tjw;fhf cj;jut[.
vjph;KiwaPl;lhsh;_fs;
(Tick) gfph;e;J bfhs;sg;gl;l tPl;oypUe;J mtiu mth;fis mg;g[wg;gLj;jpf;bfhs;Sk; cj;jut[ (Tick) ,e;j gfph;e;Jf;bfhs;sg;gl;l tPl;od; ,izahd ntW trpg;gplj;ij jUjy;_my;yJ mjw;fhd thlifia fl;LkhW gzpj;jy;
ntW cj;jut[fs; njitg;god; Fwpg;gpLf/
iii) gphpt[ 20d;go gz epthuzk;
(Tick) tUkhd ,Hg;g[ nfhug;gLk; bjhif ...........................
kUj;Jtr; bryt[ nfhug;gLk; bjhif ...........................
ghjpf;fg;gl;l egh; Msifapy; ,Ue;j brhj;Jf;fis vLj;J brd;wjhYk;_ehrkhf;fpajhYk;_mHpj;jjhYk; Vw;gl;l el;lj;jpw;F nfhug;gLk; bjhif ..............................
(Tick) ntW ,Hg;g[fs; cl;gphpt[ 10(o)y; Twg;gl;Ls;s cly; hPjpahd my;yJ kd hPjpahd fha';fSf;fhf nfhug;gLk; bjhif U/7 ,yl;rk;
ntW cj;jut[ njitg;god; Fwpg;gpLf ..................................................
iv) gphpt[ 20,d;go gz epthuzk;
vjph;KiwaPl;lhsiu fPH;f;fz;l bryt[fSf;fhf gzk; epthuzk; jUk;go cj;jut[.
(Tick) czt[ cil kUe;Jfs; kw;Wk; mog;gil njitfs;
bjhif U/4000_- khjk; xd;Wf;F (Tick) gs;spf;fl;lzk; kw;Wk; mJ bjhlh;ghd bryt[fs;
bjhif U./5000_- khjk; xd;Wf;F tPl;Lr;bryt[f;fhf bjhif ---------------- khjk; xd;Wf;F (Tick) ,J jtpu ntW bryt[fSf;fhf. Kfdpd; cah;fy;tpf;fhf bjhif U/6 ,yl;rk;
bkhj;j bjhif U/6/09/000 khjk; xd;Wf;F (Tick) ntW cj;jut[ njitg;god; Fwpg;gpLf kfd; kfs; vjph;fhy thH;f;iff;F je;ijapd; flikapy; ,Ue;J midj;J bghUSjtpa[k; bra;a[k;go cj;jutpLk;go jhH;ika[ld; nfl;Lf;bfhs;fpnwd;.
v) gphpt[ 21,;d;go ghJfhty; cj;jut[ vjph;KiwaPl;lhsiu FHe;ij _ FHe;ijfs; fPH;f;fz;l eghplk; xg;gilf;FkhW cj;jut[ (Tick) ghjpf;fg;gl;l egh;
ghjpf;fg;gl;l eghpd; rhh;ghf Fwpg;gpl;l eghplk; me;eghpd; tptuk; .........................
vi) gphpt[ 22,d;go ,Hg;gPL cj;jut[ ntW cj;jut[ njitg;god; Fwpg;gpLf tP;l;oila[k; mjpy; cs;s bghUl;fisa[k; kPl;Lj;jUk;go nfl;Lf;bfhs;fpnwd;.
Vw;fdnt ele;j _ ele;JtUk; tHf;F gw;wp tptu';fs; ,Ug;gpd;
a) ,e;jpa jz;lid rl;lk; gphpt[ jw;nghJ ePjpkd;wk;
....................................,y; epYitapy; cs;sJ. tHf;F Koe;jpUg;gpd; jug;gl;l epthuzk;............................
b) Fw;wtpay; eilKiw rl;lk; gphpt .............. jw;nghJ............................. ePjpkd;wk; ................................,y; epYitapy; cs;sJ/ tHf;F Koe;jpUg;gpd; Kotpd; tpgu';fs;......................................
c) ,e;J jpUkz rl;lk; 1956,d; gphpt[ ...................................go kD jw;nghJ .............................. ePjpkd;wk;. ............................,y; epYitapy; cs;sJ.
tHf;F Koe;jpUg;gpd; Kotpd; tpguk;...................................
d) ,e;J thhpRhpik kw;wk; $Ptdhk;r rl;lk;/ 1956 gphpt[fs; ................................... jw;nghJ .............................. ePjpkd;wk;. ............................,y; epYitapy; cs;sJ.
e) $Ptdhk;r nfhhpf;if kD gphpt[ .................................... rl;lj;jpd; fPH; epYitapy; cs;sJ/ ,ilf;fhy $Ptdhk;rk; U:/------------------------------khjk; x;dWf;F khjhe;jpu/ $Ptdhk;rk; U: -----------------------------khjk; xd;Wf;F khjhe;jpu. $Ptdhk;r cj;juthdJ U---------------------------------khjk;
f) vjph; KiwaPl;lhsh; ePjpkd;w fhtypy; itf;fg;gl;lhuh Mk; vdpy; _,y;iy.
1. ehd; ,j;Jld; ,izf;fg;gl;Ls;s kDtpd; kDjhuh; ehd; ,k;kDit vdf;fhf _ vd; kfSf;fhf _ kfDf;fhf jhf;fy; bra;fpnwd;/ 2/ ehd; o/nf/,e;jpunfhghyfpUl;ozd; cila ,aw;ifahd ghJfhtyh;
3/ ehd; ,t;tHf;if gw;wp cz;ikfsia[k; NH;epiyfisa[k; ed;F mwpe;jth; _ mwpe;jts; vd;fpw Kiwapy; ,t;thf;F K:yj;ij gpukhzkha; Twfpnwd;.
4/ tHf;fpd; kDjhuh;_ vjph; KiwaPl;lhsUld; 2_5 jdyl;Rkp efh;. neUefh; flYh; _1 vd;fpw tpyhrj;jpy; 2001 Kjy; trpj;J te;jhh;.
5/ nkw;go kD gphpt[ ------------------ goahd epthuz';fis nfhhp jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;l kDtpy; Twg;gl;Ls;s tptu';fs; vd;Dila jfty; bgw;W vd;dhy; vGjg;gl;lit Mfk;.
6/ nkw;go kDtpy; cs;s tpgu';fs; vdf;F goj;J fhz;gpf;fg;gl;L M';fpyk; _ ,e;jp_jkpH;_jkpH; bkhHpapy; tpsf;fg;gl;lJ/ 7/ ,g;gpukhz thf;FKykhdJ kDtpy; Twg;gl;Ls;s tpgu';fSld; nrh;j;J ,izg;g[ gotk; kUj;Jt rhd;W gpw ,izg;g[fisa[k; thrpf;FkhW gzpt[ld; nfl;Lf;bfhs;sg;gLfpwJ/ kD tpgu';fs; RUf;fk; fUjp kPz;Lk; xU Kiw ,';F Twg;gLtJ jtph;f;fg;gl;Ls;sJ/ 8/ kDjhuh; kDtpy; nfhug;gl;Ls;s epthuz';fis FLk;g td;Kiwfs; kPz;Lk; mth; kPJ epfH;j;jg;glyhk; vdf; fUJtjhy; ,e;ePjpkd;wj;jpd; kD K:yk; cj;jut[fis nfhhpa[s;shh;.
9/ vjph; kDjhuh; kDjhuiu bfhiy bra;JtpLtjhft[k; kPz;Lk; kPz;Lk; mtkhdg;gLj;Jntd; vd;Wk; ntiy mtUila uhqt ,l xJf;fPl;oy; fpilj;jjhft[k; me;j ntiyia ,y;yhky; bra;J tpLtjhft[k; vd kpul;o.a[s;shh;.
10/ vdnt kDtpy; nfhug;gl;Ls;s epthuz';fis cldoahf mspf;fg;gltpy;iy vdpy; kDjhuh; bgUk; gz fl;lj;jpw;Fk; _ FLk;g td;Kiw mjpfhpj;j my;yJ kPz;Lk; bjhlh;e;J elf;ff;Toa NH;epiyapy; bjhlh;e;J thH eph;ge;jpf;fg;gLthh;/ vdnt kDtpy; nfhug;gl;Ls;s cj;jut[fis kWjug;g[ ,y;yh cj;juthf (Exparte orders) mspf;Fk;go jhH;ika[ld; nfhug;gLfpwJ.
nkw;fz;l gpukhz thf;FK:yk; cs;s tpgu';fs; midj;Jk; vd;Dila mwpt[f;F vl;oa tiuapy; cz;ik vdt[k;. ve;j xU jftYk; kiwf;fg;gltpy;iy vdt[k; cWjp Twfpnwd;/ sd/- I.Vijayalakshmi thf;FK:yk; mspg;gth;
rhpghh;j;jy;
nkw;fz;l kD gj;jp 1 Kjy; 11 tiuapyhd Tw;Wfs; vd;Dila mwpt[f;F vl;oa tiuapy; rhp vdt[k; vd; jftYk; kiwf;fg;gltpy;iy vd;gija[k; cWjp Twfpnwd;/ sd/- I.Vijayalakshmi thf;FK:yk; mspg;gth FORM III gotk; / 3 (tpjpfs; 6(4) kw;Wk; (7) ghh;f;f) FLk;g td;KiwapypUe;J bgz;fis ghJfhf;Fk; rl;lk; 2005 (43/2005)/,d; gphpt[ 23(2) fPH; jhf;fy; bra;ag;gLk; gpukhz thf;FK:yk;/ Fw;wtpay; eLth; ePjpkd;wk;
P/S .............
jpUkpF/,/tp$ayl;Rkp kw;Wk; gyh;
m/m$a;gpufhc&;. kfd;
m/epntjh. kfs;
//////KiwaPl;lhsh;
// vjph; // jpU/nf/mUs; & kw;Wk; gyh;
jpU/nf/bry;tuh$;. Rnfhjuh;
jpUkjp/nf/rnuh$h. Rnfhjhp /////// vjph; KiwaPl;lhsh;
gpukhz thf;FK:yk;
Ch;. flY}h; khtl;lk;. g[Jf;Fg;gk;. g[Jj;bjU. Fjt[ vz;/38-A trpf;Fk; T.K.,e;jpuh nfhghy fpUc;&zd;/kfshfpa cwtpduhfpa tp$ayl;Rkp vd;fpw ehd; gpukhzkha; jUk; ;thf;FK:yk; ahbjdpy; 1 thuj;jpw;F Fiwthf 1 khjj;jpw;F Fiwthf 1 khjj;jpw;F mjpfkhf fhyk; Fwpg;gpLf
g) ntz;lg;gLk; nfhhpf;if : jia Th;e;J kpftpiutpy; tHf;fpid Koj;J vd; gps;isfspd; gog;g[ kw;Wk; vjph;fhy eyDf;F Mtd bra;a[k; go jhH;ika[ld; nfl;Lf;bfhs;fpnwd;/ ntz;lg;gLk; nfhhpf;if :
vdnt. Khz;g[kpF ePjpkd;wj;jpy; gzpthf ntz;LtJ ahbjdpy;. Nfhug;gl;l epthuz';fis mspj;J. Jf;f cj;jut[fis ePjpkd;w ghh;itapy; jf;fJk;. RhpahdJk; vd;W fUJk; cj;jut[fs; ,t;tHf;fpd; cz;ik Tw;Wfs; kw;Wk; NH;epiyfis fzf;fpy; bfhz;L ghjpf;fg;gl;l egiu FLk;g td;KiwapypUe;J ghJfhf;Fk; tpjkhf ePjpapd; eyd; fUjpa[k; cj;jut[fis gpwg;gpf;FkhW jhH;ika[ld; ntz;of;bfhs;fpnwd;/ ,lk; : sd/- I.Vijayalakshmi ehs; : 8/1/10 g[fhh;jhuh; ghjpf;fg;gl;l egh;
K:ykhf rhpghh;j;jy;
nkw;fz;l kD gj;jp 1 Kjy; 12 tiuapyhd Tw;Wfs; vd;Dila mwpt[f;F vl;oa tiuapy; rhp vdt[k; ve;j jftYk; kiwf;fgltpy;iy vd;gija[k; cWjpahf Twfpnwd;/ kDjhuh;
verified by me and signed before me ghJfhg;g[ mYtyhpd; ifbahg;gk;
njjp
47. The respondent-wife, has marked Exs.P1 to P16, as stated supra. Cross-examination of the wife, has been done, on 07.04.2010. Again, the respondent-wife has been examined on 10.08.2010. On the aspect of forgery and fraud, nothing seemed to have been elicited in the cross-examination of the respondent-wife. Perusal of his testimony, does not indicate that the party-in-person/husband has alleged forgery of Ex.P3 - Discharge summary issued by Krishna Hospital, Cuddalore and also about the letter, vide R.O.C.No.474/A4/08, dated 08.01.2010, of the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore, addressed to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore.
48. There are no averments in the counter affidavit or grounds in the appeal, alleging forgery. Even in the Memorandum of Grounds of Revision, there is no specific ground of fraud. Only in his oral submissions and written arguments, filed before this Court, the petitioner has alleged criminality of the respondent-wife and commission of fraudulent acts by the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddaore and the District Protection Officer, under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Cuddalore, in cheating the Court, as stated supra. Allegations made against the officers, are not supported by any averments in the counter affidavit and no evidence has been adduced.
49. Official acts cannot be attributed with motives, such as, fraud and dishonesty. The party-in-person has not taken any effort to adduce evidence, even to substantiate the fraud against the respondents. He has not discharged the burden. Particulars of fraud is required to be pleaded and the petitioner has no effort to any whisper about the fraud. Allegations of fraud, illegality, cheating, misrepresentation played by the respondent, in prosecuting the reliefs of injunction and divorce and under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are liable to be rejected in limini and accordingly, rejected.
50. On the submission that there was no clarity in the order, granting permission to reside in the shared household at Door No.2/5, Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Nehru Nagar, Cuddalore-1 and that it was just like a opinion, from the perusal of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, it could be deduced that when the respondent has sought for a direction, to handover and deliver the possession, the learned Judge, by observing that he cannot pass such an order, but having regard to the powers, under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, to grant residence order, has issued appropriate directions, permitting both the wife and children to reside in the shared household, at the abovesaid address. The contention of the party-in-person that it was like an opinion and not a decision, is untenable.
51. On the contention that in the opening sentence in C.A.No.32 of 2011, dated 10.12.2011, the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, has made a statement that, this criminal appeal coming on 04.10.2012, for hearing, the party-in-person has stated that the learned Judge has committed a mistake, by referring the same date in the judgment, this Court only clarifies that the appeal was taken on file on 04.10.2012 and after hearing the parties, judgment has been delivered on 10.12.2012.
52. One of the submissions advanced by the party-in-person is that Pw.2, Ajay Sharma, son of the petitioner was born on 25.07.1993 and as on 07.04.2011, he has attained majority and hence, by misrepresenting and committing illegality, son of the petitioner has obtained the order of maintenance. From the date of birth, ie., 25.07.1993, it could be deduced that Pw.2, Ajay Sharma, son of the petitioner, has attained majority only on 24.07.2011 and thus, on the date of passing of the orders by the lower Court, ie., on 07.04.2011, by granting residence and maintenance orders, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, has not committed any mistake, nor there is any misrepresentation, fraud, illegality or cheating by PW.2, as alleged by the party-in-person.
53. On the contentions that the learned Judicial Magistrate has not followed the procedure, contemplated under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and that without FIR or Domestic Violence Incident Report by the District Social Welfare Officer, under Section 9 of the Act, under Section 9 of the Act, the case has been taken on file, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, from the perusal of the files, it could be deduced that on the complaint of the respondent-wife, the District Protection Officer, Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Cuddalore, has conducted an enquiry and submitted a Domestic Violence Incident Report and on that basis, the District Social Welfare Officer, vide R.O.C.No.474/A4/08, dated 08.01.2010, has addressed a letter to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, to take the case on file. The District Protection Officer, has also signed the said letter.
54. The respondent-wife had not preferred an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, directly to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, which one of the permissible modes, under the Act, to take the case on file. She has only chosen to complain to the authorities under the Act and from the perusal of the letter of the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore, addressed to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, it is clear that an enquiry has been conducted into the alleged acts of domestic violence by the petitioner/husband. Accordingly, a Domestic Violence Incident Report has been drawn by the District Protection Officer, Domestic Violence Act, Cuddalore. Only after taking note of the Domestic Violence Incident Report, along with the other particulars, appended to the report, as per the Act and the letter of the District Social Welfare Officer, Cuddalore, the complaint has been taken on file, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore.
55. The District Protection Officer, Cuddalore, has taken note of the acts of domestic violence, testimony of the children, parents, sister of the respondent, complaint, dated 08.06.2009 addressed to the All Women Police Station, Tapes, Medical Reports, complaint given to the Superintendent of Police and other documents. In the light of the discussion and the decisions, stated supra, the contention of the petitioner that there is a legal lacuna in not marking the Domestic Violence Incident Report, cannot be countenanced. Such a report is only a basis for taking the case on file, under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. It is very much available on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate. Proceedings instituted under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, cannot be set at naught for the abovesaid reason.
56. Even if a case is taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate, on the basis of the report of the District Protection Officer, the party who suffered acts of domestic violence, has to adduce evidence before the Court of competent jurisdiction to substantiate the same, with reference to the reliefs sought for, in the report. On that aspect, perusal of the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, clearly shows that besides adducing the oral evidence, the respondent-wife has marked as many as 16 documents. The petitioner-husband has also adduced evidence and marked 20 documents. Considering the fact that the evidence adduced by the parties should be scrutinised thoroughly, in the opening sentence of the judgment in the appeal, the appellate Court has made a note of the same, before the analysing the evidence, adduced by both the parties.
57. Finding of fact of the domestic violence, which is a requirement, under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, for passing suitable orders, considered by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, confirmed in appeal, by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuddalore Division, Cuddalore District, in C.A.No.32 of 2011 dated 10.12.2011, cannot be said to be perverse or without any evidence, warranting interference.
58. Allegations made against the respondent, for the first time, in this revision case, by way of oral submission and written arguments, not only deserves to be rejected, it also requires to be condemned. Scathing allegations made against the learned counsel, who appeared for the respondent in the lower Court and the officials, deserves imposition of costs.
59. An argument is based on pleadings and evidence. Appearance of a party in person is permitted in Courts. But taking liberty and advantage of the same, he/she cannot be permitted to make allegations against public servants, in the form of oral or written submissions, contending that they have cheated the Court, without any pleadings and evidence. Even if a party is duly represented by a learned counsel, that is not permissible.
60. Though the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Cuddalore, has granted maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to the children, on appeal by the petitioner, considering the fact that she was not employed, the appellate Court has reduced the maintenance to Rs.3,500/-. For the conduct of the party in person, in making wild allegations against the learned counsel for the respondent in the lower Court, that he has prepared the false applications and against the public servants and while dismissing this Criminal Revision Case, this Court deems it fit to impose costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only), to be paid to the respondent, within a period of one month, from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
S. MANIKUMAR, J.
skm
61. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed, with costs.
11.03.2015 Index: Yes Internet: Yes skm To
1. The Sessions Judge, Cuddalore Division, Cuddalore District.
2. The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Cuddalore.
Crl.R.C.No.454 of 2013