R NAMMALWAR; UMA Vs. GOVINDARAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Crl. M.P. No. 7785 of 1985 the petitioners are accused 1, 3, 4 and 7 in C.C. No. 895 of 1985 onthe file of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul subsequent to the filing of this petition, the second petitioner Rangaswami Naicker (third accused) and the fourth petitioner Srinivas Naicker (seventh accused) died. Therefore, this petition is now restricted to R. Nammalwar first petitioner (first accused) and Subbulakshmi, the third petitioner (fourth accused). The three petitioners in Crl. M.P. No. 8403 of 1985 are respectively accused 2, 5 and 6 in the same celendar case.

(2.) Both these petitions have been filed to call for the records and quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 895 of 1985 on the file of the trial Court as not maintainable and an abuse of process of Court.

(3.) A few facts are necessary for the disposal of these petitions. The respondent Govindaraju is the elder brother of Vanaja who had married the first accused (first petitioner in Crl. M.P. No. 7785 of 1985 on 26th May 1980. The third petitioner Sub-bulakshmi (fourth accused) in Cil. M.P. No. 7785 of 1985 if the mother of the first petitioner. The petitioners in Crl. M.P. No. 8403 of 1985 are respectively the alleged second wife of Nammalwar (first accused) and the father and mother of the alleged second wife Uma. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Ss. 494 1 P.C. and 494 read with Section 109 I.P.C. The respondent, after obtaining leave of the trial Court under Section 198(1)(c) Cr. P.C, filed a private complaint against the petitioners and two other accused who are since deceased, containing the following salient allegations: Vanaja, the younger sister of the respondent, was married to the first accused on 26th May 1980 at Nadayaneri village, soon after the marriage, the spouses lived together at Nadayaneri. Some time thereafter, due to the instigation of accused 3 and 4, Vanaja was pestered to get jewellery and cash from her parental house by the first accused. Vanaja could not accede to the demand made by her husband due to the poor family circumstances of her parents. In or about October 1980, Vanaja was thrown out of the marital house by accused 1, 3 and 4. Some time in February 1981 the fourth accused took Vanaja over again to the marital house with the consent of her parents. Vanaja lived happily for about one or two months and thereafter, accused 1, 3 and 4 reiterated their dowry demand. On 14-7-1981 Vanaja was sent out from the house of her husband after ill-treatment, leading to her taking shelter in the house of her mother, situated within the jurisdication of the trial Magistrate.