K. CHOKKALINGAM Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the sole accused in C.C.No.564 of 2010 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli and was the husband of the second respondent. The present petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.564 of 2010 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli, in and by which, the petitioner/sole accused is facing prosecution for the alleged commission of the offences, under Sections 498-A, 506(i), 294(b) of I.P.C. and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act, 2002.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of this petition, briefly narrated, for the purpose of disposal of this Criminal Original Petition, are as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the typed-set of documents, containing statements of witnesses and would submit that main allegations are levelled against the parents of the petitioner and in-laws of the second respondent and the first respondent police after investigation, has said that no case has been made out against the accused 2 to 5 and laid the final report only against the petitioner and would further add that the statements of the witnesses examined during investigation, primarily accused the other accused, against whom, no charge sheet has been laid and except making the mere allegation that the petitioner has attempted to set her on fire, no materials have been placed to show that the petitioner has committed the offences, for which, he has been charged. It is the further submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner has also exhibited his good intention to join with the second respondent, by filing H.M.O.P. No.172 of 2005, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for restitution of conjugal rights and though it was allowed, the second respondent has failed to join with him and in so far as the maintenance case filed by her in M.C. 262 of 2007 was allowed, with regard to the male child and without making any challenge, he continues to pay the maintenance and despite his best efforts to persuade the second respondent to join with him, she did do so and left with no other option only, he filed O.P. No.2040 of 2008, seeking for divorce and the Third Additional Family Court, Chennai has recorded the categorical finding that for the past eleven years, the petitioner as well as the second respondent are living separately and the oral and documentary evidence produced by him do prove that he sustained mental cruelty in the hands of the respondent therein and despite the efforts taken by the petitioner to persuade his wife/second respondent to join with him, she did do so and in the light of the materials placed, the present proceedings are nothing, but an abuse of process of law and prays for quashment of the same.