NEELA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed for the relief to call for the records in connection with C.C.No.138 of 2017 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District in relation to Crime No.3 of 2016, on the file of the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Kanyakumari, Kanyakumari District and quash the same as illegal, as far as the petitioner is concerned.

(2.) The case of the prosecution before the trial Court is that one Sivathanu is the husband of the 2nd respondent herein. On 10.02.2014, the betrothal in respect to the marriage of the 2nd respondent with Sivathanu was solemnized. When at that time the present petitioner and others, who are all related to each other, demanded the parents of the 2nd respondent to pay Rs.7,00,000/- and thereafter, the said amount has been given by the parents of the 2nd respondent. Subsequently, on 25.05.2014, the marriage between the Sivathanu and the 2nd respondent was solemnized, as per the Hindu Rites and Customs. After the marriage, both of them have lead their matrimonial life in Kulasekarapuram Village. However, in the month of June, 2014, all the accused in C.C.No.138 of 2017 harassed the 2nd respondent to bring additional dowry. In this regard, in the presence of the 1st accused, who is the husband of the 2nd respondent, all other accused insulted the 2nd respondent and demanded to bring Rs.1,00,000/- from her parents- house. Further, on 11.08.2014, at about 7.00 p.m., when the neighbouring house owners questioned about the harassment made by the accused, all the accused instructed the neighbouring house owners for not entering into the house in which the 2nd respondent is residing. Therefore, all the 6 accused in the above referred Calender Case committed an offence punishable under Sections 498(A) and 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) Further, In the above referred Calender Case, the petitioner is arrayed as 4th accused. As per the prosecution, she committed an offence under Section 498A, 324 and 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. In fact, the petitioner is the cousin to the husband of 2nd respondent. After the marriage, the petitioner was residing with her husband in a far of place. Only in order to harass the petitioner, the 1st respondent police foisted a false case, without conducting any proper enquiry. The 161 Cr.P.C., statement recorded by the 1st respondent Police would clearly reveal the fact that at the time of occurrence, the petitioner herein is not present in the occurrence place, as narrated by the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the charge sheet filed against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner accordingly, prayed to allow this application.