P.Esakkimuthu v. P.Ayyappan

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 24/11/2022

CORAM

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN Crl.RC(MD)No.974 of 2022 P.Esakkimuthu : Petitioner/Petitioner Vs.

1.P.Ayyappan 2.M.Muthu Selvan 3.Smt.Ajitha 4.Mrs.Subba Ananthi 5.Mrs.Saroja : Respondents/Respondents PRAYER:-This Criminal Revision has been filed under section 397 r/w 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records and to set aside the order dated 05/08/2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Nagercoil, in Crl.M.P No.7746 of 2021.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Umasankar For R1 and R5 : No appearance For R2 and R4 : Mr.D.Srinivasaraghavan For 3rd respondent : Mr.N.Shyllappa Kalyan

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision has been filed seeking in order to set aside the order, dated 05/08/2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Nagercoil, in Crl.M.P No.7746 of 2021.

2.The facts in brief:- The petitioner filed a complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C before the trial court with the following allegations:- The complainant;s 2nd daughter by name Saranya was working in Syndicate Bank, Nagercoil. She was born, on 17/07/1991. On the date of the complaint, she was aged about 30 years. The first accused is his owner brother and the marriage proposal for his 2nd daughter namely Saranya was arranged. At that time, the bio-data of the second accused was available. On enquiry, they came to know that he was already married and got two children. So the marriage proposal was dropped, on 19/04/2021. In the meantime, the above said Saranya went for job, but later did not return. So a complaint was lodged. He came to know that she was kidnapped and kept in an illegal custody in the house of the first accused. During enquiry, the police without properly considering

the facts, left the accused persons and permitted the above said Saranya to go along with them. Later, he came to know that Saranya was married to the second accused and the same was registered in the Thiruvattar Sub Registrar Office. So he sent a legal notice, on 23/08/2021 to A1 to A5 stating that the said Saranya was brain washed by the accused persons and got married to A2, for which A4 and A5 colluding with A2 and further stating that the above said act committed by the accused persons are punishable under sections 366, 417, 506(1), 494, 495 IPC r/w 34, 120B IPC.

3.The above said complaint was enquired by the trial court, and by order, dated 05/08/2022 dismissed the same stating that no prima facie case has been made out to take the cognizance of the offence. By exercising the power under section 203 Cr.P.C, the above said private complaint was dismissed.

4.Now questioning the legality of the above said order, this revision has been preferred.

5.The respondent2 to 4 were also served and they also represented by counsel.

6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for either side and perused the materials available on record. 7.Perusal of the entire records and the facts and circumstances of the case clearly shows that the petitioner is not satisfied with the marriage that was performed by her second daughter namely Saranya with A2. He was not interested in the above said marriage and it has been stated by him to the effect that already A2 was married and got two children also. But whether any such complaint is maintainable at his instance is the only question, which arises for consideration for sustaining the action under section 494 IPC. Only the aggrieved party can approach the court by way of filing a private complaint. Here, the petitioner is the father and his daughter has no grievance.

8.With regard to the above said marriage during the course of enquiry, it came to notice by the police to the effect that the allegation of second marriage itself

is a false one and he sent a detailed report, on 06/09/2022 to the petitioner and his Advocate, who issued the notice on his behalf, wherein it has been stated that such an allegation is a false one and she only voluntarily married the A2 and without any reason, the marriage proposal of A2 was objected by the parents. The reason for the above said change of mind is not stated in the reply. She has stated that there is continuous life threat to them, at the instance of her parents. So from the above said reply, it is seen that it was a voluntary marriage between herself and A2.

9.Even the attempt that was made by the before the Division Bench of this court by filing HCP(MD)No.1485 of 2021 did not yield any result. Finding that with false averments, the above said petition was filed, penalty of Rs.5,000/- was imposed upon the petitioner. The order is dated 05/10/2021. But even before the above said petition, it appears hat the above said complaint was enquired by the police and later, it was closed. So suppressing all these facts the petitioner filed the above said HCP. All those things were taken in by the trial court to find out that no prima facie case has been

made out by the petitioner. The narration of the above events and the facts and circumstances clearly shows that absolutely, no prima facie ground is made out by the petitioner to take cognizance of the offence. This is nothing, but another attempt made by the petitioner to abuse the process of the court and law. So on the sole ground, the revision is liable to be dismissed. 10.In the result, this criminal revision is dismissed .

24/11/2022 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er To, The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil.

G.ILANGOVAN, J er Crl.RC(MD)No.974 of 2022 24/11/2022