RAVICHANDRAN Vs. MARIYAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ravinchandran (petitioner) is the accused in C.C. No. 471 of 1986 on the file of Judicial II Class Magistrate, Sirkali.

(2.) The succinct facts leading to the filing of the petition are: - Mariyammal, respondent herein, is unmarried. The respondent is living with her parents at Kattunaicken street, Vaitheeswarankoil. Her father is owning a store dealing with articles required for the purpose of pooja to deities. Opposite to the shop, one Ravinchandran, the petitioner/accused is also owning - a shop transacting the same business. The respondent used to assist her brother in the shop. In that process, she came into contact with the petitioner and in due course of time, a bondage of love got solemnised between them. They were moving like that for about 3 years. It is alleged that the petitioner made persistent efforts to enjoy her blissful company, even prior to their marriage. She appeared to have been evading such request all along. On 18-1-1985 at about 9.00 a.m. the petitioner was said to have made a representation, in the shape of promise that he would marry her in due course and made her accept his request of sharing bed together, at the garden situate behind Samiyar Madam. Only believing on such representation, she is said to have complied with his request. Consequently, she got conceived and the matter became known to one and all. A panchayat was said to have been convened to amicably settle the dispute between them. It was suggested by the panchayatdars that the petitioner should give 100 kulis of land in favour of the respondent besides giving her Rs. 3,000/- in lieu of her terminating the pregnancy and marrying some one of her choice. To this course, she was not said to be amenable. The petitioner was also said to have taken a different attitude and refused to marry her. Thereafter, she lodged a complaint before the police. That was after all a futfile exercise. Consequently, she preferred a complaint before the Judicial II Class Magistrate, Sirkali, which was taken on file in the aforesaid Calendar Case, agianst the petitioner/ accused for the alleged offence under S. 417, I.P.C.

(3.) On receipt of process, the petitioner appeared before the Court below and engaged a counsel of his choice. The respondent proof of her case examined 8 witnesses and the Court below framed a charge against the petitioner for the offence under S. 417, I. P.C. It is only at this stage, the petitioner has come forward with the present action, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the Criminal Proceedings initiated in this case.