M.Naga Jothi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Dindigul

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR Crl. OP(MD).No.16975 of 2025 and Crl.M.P(MD).Nos.16948 & 16949 of 2025 1.M.Naga Jothi 2.Kiruba Nandhini 3.R.Sivakumar ....Petitioners Vs 1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by the Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Dindigul In Crime No.20 of 2022 2.Kishore Kumar 3.N.Megalai ....Respondents Prayer: This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, to call for the entire records pertaining to the charge sheet filed in C.C.No.438 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul and against the petitioner concern quash the same as illegal.

1/5

For Petitioners : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh Government Advocate (Crl.side) for R1 :Mr.K.Ganesha Moorthy for R2 :Mr.S.Sarvagam Prabhu for R3

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by accused Nos.2 to 4 in C.C.No. 438 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul seeking to quash the charge sheet which has been laid under Sections 294(b), 323, 498(A), 406 and 506(i) of I.P.C and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2.As per case of the prosecution, all the accused persons have threatened the defacto complainant on 06.06.2021 and demanded dowry of 50 sovereigns of jewels and she was thrown away from the matrimonial home. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that petitioners 2 and 3 are residing away from the family at Chidambaram and they have no connection whatsoever with the incident alleged to have been happened on 06.06.2021.

4.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent pointed out that the specific allegations have been made out as against the 2/5

petitioners 2 and 3 herein and therefore, it is a matter of evidence. 5.Heard both sides and perused the material records. 6.As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, specific allegations have been made out as against the petitioners herein that they had threatened the defacto complaint on 06.06.2021. Whether the said incidents are taken place or not is the matter of evidence which has to be appreciated only by the trial Court.

7.In view of the above said facts, there are no merits in the petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 04-03-2026 msa To 3/5

1.The Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul 2.Inspector of Police All Women Police Station Dindigul In Crime No.20 of 2022 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

4/5

msa Crl. OP(MD).No.16975 of 2025 and Crl.M.P(MD).Nos.16948 & 16949 of 2025 04.03.2026 5/5