Madras High CourtCRL OP/8288/2022dismissed

Suloshanakumar v. State Rep By

2024-03-19Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.03.2024

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRL.OP No. 8288 of 2022 Crl.MP. Nos. 4839 & 4841 of 2022 Suloshanakumar ...PETITIONER Vs.

1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALL WOMEN POLICE STATION SOORAMANGALAM SALEM.

2 SELVARAJ ...RESPONDENTS PRAYER : This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records relating to the case in C.C No. 496 of 2020 in crime No. 10 of 2019 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court at Salem and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.C.Shyaamala For R1 : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 : Mr.J.Prithivi for Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran

ORDER

The petitioner herein filed this petition to call for the records relating to the case in C.C No. 496 of 2020 in crime No. 10 of 2019 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court at Salem and quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the mother-inlaw of the second respondent's daughter, the second respondent's daughter Kiruthiga was married the first accused and begotten two children. Thereafter, due to misunderstanding aroused between them. According to the second respondent's daughter/Kiruthiga, the first accused had illegal intimacy with another women when it was questioned by her he threatened her. Thereafter, the said Kiruthiga and the first accused along with children went to Dubai where the petitioner abused and threatened the Kiruthiga by the petitioner and her husband/first accused. Hence, she returned to India. Hence, the father of the Kirughiga gave a complaint FIR was registered in crime No. 10 of 2019, after investigation final report was filed and the same was taken on file in C.C No. 496 of 2020. Challenging the said final report the petitioner filed this petition.

3. Heard both sides.

4. According to the Kiruthiga, the petitioner had illegal intimacy with another women and due to the intervention of her mother-in-law/petitioner

her life was disturbed. It is matter of trial. I am not inclined to allow this petition. However, the petitioner is aged about 70 years, her personal appearance is ordered to be dispensed with. Further, the Trial court is directed to complete the Trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequentially, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

19.03.2024 pbl To The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

pbl CRL.OP No. 8288 of 2022 Crl.MP. Nos. 4839 & 4841 of 2022 19.03.2024