← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/1516/2025dismissed

Muthukamatchi v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2025-01-27Honourable Mr Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.01.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1029 of 2025 Muthukamatchi ... Petitioner Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu rep. by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Batlagundu Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No. 256/2024).

2. Meena ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, To quash the FIR in Crime No. 256/2024 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police and pass any other order or direction as this Honble Court.

For Petitioner : M/s.Thalaimutharasu.G For Respondents 1 : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor 1/6

ORDER

This Petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R in Crime No. 256 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police.

2. The crux of the case is that the second respondent/defacto complainant gave a complaint before the first respondent police stating that due to matrimonial dispute, the defacto complainant and the petitioner are living separately. On 11.06.2024 at 05.30p.m., the defacto complainant went to the house of her husband. At that time, the defacto complainant was pregnant and knowing that her father-in-law abused her and kicked in her stomach and also assaulted her. Based on the same was registered in Crime No.256 of 2024 on 12.06.2024 for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 354, 312, 506(i) IPC.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent. Perused the materials available on record.

4. On perusal of the records, this Court satisfy with the ingredients of the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 354, 312 and 506(i) 2/6

of IPC and the same is required to be investigated by the police officer. 4.1.Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following cases; ● Gimpex (P) Ltd. v. Manoj Goel reported in 2022 (11) SCC 705 :: 2021 SCC Online SC 925, ● Amish Devgan v. Union of India, reported in (2021) 1 SCC 1 : (2021) 1 SCC (Cri) 247 :: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 994, ● H.P. Cricket Assn. v. State of H.P., reported in (2020) 18 SCC 465 : (2021) 3 SCC (Cri) 555 : 2018 SCC OnLine SC 2419, ● Rajeev Kourav v. Baisahab, reported in (2020) 3 SCC 317 : (2020) 2 SCC (Cri) 51 : 2020 SCC OnLine SC 168, ● Saranya v.

investigation. Hence, this Court finds no reason to entertain this quash petition when the allegations made in the FIR, prima facie constitute the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 354, 312 and 506(i) of IPC. Further, this Court is unable to accept the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner to appreciate the material produced before this Court and the defence of the petitioner at this stage.

5.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. The respondent Police is directed to file final report in Cr.No.256 of 2024 before the concerned Court within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to file a petition for quash, after filing of final report, if so advised. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

27.01.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PNM 4/6

To

1. The State of Tamilnadu rep. by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Batlagundu Police Station, Dindigul District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.

PNM/sbn ORDER IN and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.1029 of 2025 27.01.2025 6/6