Mrs.Meena v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON: 02.05.2017 DELIVERED ON: 07.06.2017
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH Crl.O.P. (MD) No.4720 of 2017 & Crl.M.P. (MD) Nos.3330 & 3331 of Meena Petitioner vs.
State represented through the Inspector of Police Usilampatti Town Police Station in Crime No.439/2014 Shanthi Respondents Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. seeking to call for the records relating to S.C. No.100 of 2015 pending on the file of the Additional District Court (Mahila Court), Madurai and quash the same.
For petitioner Mr.T.K. Gopalan For R1 Mr. K. Anbarasan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been preferred seeking to call for the records relating to S.C. No.100 of 2015 pending on the file of the Additional District Court (Mahila Court), Madurai and quash the same.
2.For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their name.
3.On the complaint of Shanthi, the second respondent herein, the first respondent police registered a case in Cr. No.439 of 2014 and after completing the investigation, filed a charge sheet, which is now pending in S.C. No.100 of 2015 before the Mahila Court, Madurai, against Easwaran (A1) and Meena (A2), for offences under Sections 449, 302, 506(ii) and 109, IPC read with Section 302, IPC, challenging which, Meena (A2) is before this Court.
4.Heard Mr. T.K. Gopalan, learned counsel for Meena and Mr.K.Anbarasan, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the first respondent/State.
5.
The facts of this case make an interesting reading. 5.1 The deceased Revathy was the daughter of Easwaran and Shanthi. Easwaran had a brother by name Brammadevan who was married to Meena and they have a daughter. Brammadevan died a few years back and the daughter of Brammadevan and Meena was being brought up by Easwaran and Shanthi as their own child, along with the deceased Revathy in Karukkattaanpatty. After the demise of Brammadevan, Meena (A2) went to her parents' house at Surulipatti, Kambam and lived with her brother Easwaran (A1). It may be necessary to strike a note of caution here that there are two Easwarans in this case, viz., Easwaran (Shanthi's husband) and Easwaran (A1) who is the brother of Meena (A2).
5.2 It is the specific case of the prosecution that Easwaran (A1) [brother of Meena (A2)] wanted to marry Revathy, who was working as a nurse and he was courting her, but, Shanthi, mother of Revathy, spurned the offer. It is also alleged that Meena (A2) was helping her brother Easwaran (A1) in all possible ways to cement his love with the deceased Revathy, but, to no avail. It is the further case of the prosecution that Meena (A2) asked Shanthi for Revathy's hand for her brother Easwaran (A1), for which, Shanthi put firmly her foot down saying that she would rather get her daughter Revathy married to someone else and not to Easwaran (A1). Getting annoyed by this, it is alleged that on 12.12.
2014, Meena (A2) went to the house of Shanthi in the guise of seeing her daughter at the time when Shanthi had gone out of the house on some work and Meena (A2) is said to have alerted Easwaran (A1), her brother, that Revathy is alone at her house. When Shanthi returned home, she was shocked to see Easwaran (A1) indiscriminately attacking Revathy and murdering her. Hence, the FIR and the consequential charge sheet. Mr. T.K. Gopalan, learned counsel for Meena (A2) passionately contended that Meena (A2) has been falsely implicated in this case inasmuch as she was living under the patronage of Shanthi since Meena's daughter was being brought up by Shanthi and therefore, Meena (A2) would not have been a party to the murder of Shanthi's daughter Revathy.
7.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) refuted the above contention of the learned counsel for Meena (A2). 8.This Court gave its anxious consideration to the rival submissions.
9.Though, at the first blush, the argument of Mr. T.K. Gopalan sounded plausible, yet, on a closer scrutiny of the facts, it is seen that Meena (A2) had been consistently asking for the hand of
the deceased Revathy for her brother Easwaran (A1), which was being resisted by both Shanthi and Revathy herself. It is specifically alleged that on 12.12.2004, Meena (A2) came to the house and informed her brother Easwaran (A1) and left the house so that she is not there when something untoward happens.
At this juncture, it would be profitable to refer to Section 107, IPC, which reads thus:
"107.
Abetment of a thing:
A person abets the doing of a thing, who -- First - instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly - Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly - Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."
In the considered opinion of this Court, the act of Meena (A2) informing her brother Easwaran (A1) on 12.12.2014 that Revathy was at home alone, would fall within the meaning of the third clause, viz., intentionally aiding the offender and thereby would attract Section 109, IPC.
Thus, when there are prima facie materials for the prosecution to proceed, this is not a fit case to quash the prosecution at this juncture.
In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as being devoid of merits, with liberty to the petitioner to raise all the points before the Trial Court. It is made clear that whatever is stated in this order is only to the limited extent of deciding this quash petition and the Trial Court shall proceed with the trial in accordance with law, without, in any manner, being influenced by what is stated above. Connected Crl.M.Ps. are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(WRITS) / True Copy / Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S.) To The Inspector of Police Usilampatti Town Police Station The Additional District Judge (Mahila Judge) Madurai
The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court +1 CC TO MR.T.K.GOPALAN, ADVOCATE,SR NO.58924 cad MAS/JC/SAR4:14.06.2017:4P-5C order in Crl.O.P. (MD) No.4720 of 2017 07.06.2017