Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/11293/2021disposed of

Saravana Pandi v. The Superintendent Of Police

2021-09-17Honourable Mr Justice G.Ilangovan2 pages

Crl O.P(MD)No.11293 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17/09/2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11293 of 2021 Saravana Pandi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Dindigul District.

3.Sasikala 4.Menaka ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to direct the respondent No.2 to not to interfere in the civil dispute of the petitioner with the respondent No.4. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kameswaran For R-1 & R2 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

This petition is filed seeking direction to the respondent No.2 to not to interfere in the civil dispute of the petitioner with the fourth respondent.

2. By order dated 12.08.2021, notice was ordered to the fourth respondent for exploring possibility of settlement. But, service is awaited. So far as the private notice is concerned, the petitioner has not taken private notice. Only on the ground of exploring the possibility of settlement, notice was ordered to the fourth respondent.

3. The Petitioner says that the fourth respondent preferred a false complaint against the petitioner. The case was registered for the offences under Sections 406, 506(i) r/w Section 34 IPC and Section 4 of TNPWH Act. 498(A) IPC. The Judicial Magistrate cum Additional Mahila Court, Madurai had acquitted the petitioner in C.C.NO.498 of 2014 on 11.07.2019.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl O.P(MD)No.11293 of 2021

4. The fourth respondent is paying maintenance as per the order made in M.C. No.201 of 2014. The divorce petition filed by the petitioner as well as the petition filed by fourth respondent for restitution of conjugal rights are pending before the family Court, Madurai.

5. In such circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no possibility for any settlement.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the complaint given by the third respondent has been closed in CSR. No.387 of 2021 on 01.08.2021.

7. Let the parties work out their remedy in the pending matters in H.M.O.P. No. 436 of 2020 and H.O.P. No. 752 of 2020, which are pending before the family Court, Madurai. Since the petitioner is not ready for amicable settlement, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition.

8. In fine, this petition is disposed of as infructuous. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) CM TO:

1.The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11293 of 2021 17.09.2021 RD(1.10.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2