(1.) THIS petition is filed u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. to quash Annexure -I complaint pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -II, Kochi as C.C. No. 1098/2005 by invoking the inherent jurisdiction. The above case was filed by the 2nd respondent alleging cruelty by the husband and relatives of the husband. After considering the entire materials on record, the learned Magistrate took cognizance under Section 498A IPC only against the 1st accused. The learned Magistrate specifically found that no offence is made out against the petitioners herein. On 6.3.2009, the defacto complainant, 2nd respondent was examined as PW1. Thereafter, she filed C.M.P. No. 1081/2009 to implead the petitioners herein as additional accused 2 to 8 in the above case. According to the petitioners, there was no evidence adduced in the trial court to invoke Section 319 Cr.PC at that stage and when there is no materials to invoke Section 319 Cr.P.C., the cognizance of the offence taken against the petitioners is a mere abuse of the process of the Court. Hence, the petitioners pray to invoke the inherent jurisdiction u/s. 482 Cr.P.C.
(2.) THE 2nd respondent's allegation in Annexure -1 complaint was that the petitioner was married the 2nd respondent on 8.11.1993 at Pathumthirumal Devaswom temple, Palluruthy as per Hindu customary rites. In the wedlock, two daughters were born to them. While residing so, the accused ill -treated her demanding more amount as dowry. Subsequently, the marriage was divorced. In such circumstances, she filed Annexure -I complaint against the accused.
(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent strongly resisted the above contention and contended that the oral evidence adduced by PW1 is sufficient to invoke Section 319 Cr.P.C. The overt act of the petitioners was specifically mentioned by PW1, while she was adducing evidence in the trial Court. Therefore, the totality of the evidence shows that the petitioners are also to be tried together with the 1st accused.