MUTHULAKSHMI Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the third accused in Crime No. 404 of 2009 on the file of the first respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 498(A), 506(II) and 379 of I.P.C. Seeking to quash the same, the petitioner is before this Court with this petition.

(2.) I have heard Mr.A.Ramesh, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.M.Maharaja, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and Mr.K.Duraisamy learned senior counsel appearing for the second respondent as well as perused the records carefully.

(3.) THE learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that even according to the allegations, in the F.I.R. the petitioner was not physically present and participated in the occurrence. Therefore, Sections 147 and 148 of I.P.C. cannot be invoked against her at all. So far as Section 498(A) of I.P.C. is concerned, absolutely there is no allegation made out in the complaint and therefore Section 498(A) also has got no role to play at all in the case. So far as Section 506(ii) and 379 of I.P.C. are concerned, according to the learned senior counsel there is no material to show that the petitioner had anything to do with the said alleged occurrence committed by rest of the accused. Thus, according to the learned senior counsel, she has been included as an accused in the F.I.R. out of mala fide.