S KAMATCHI Vs. R THIAYAGARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the complaint in C.C.No.212 of 2012, dated 10.09.2012 order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-V, Salem.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the daughter-in-law and the respondent/defacto complainant is the father-in-law. The petitioner got married with the son of the respondent viz., T.Sundararajan on 05.02.1994 and their marriage was arranged one out of their wedlock and a male child was born to them on 28.09.1996. Though there was misunderstanding between the petitioner and her husband and also with her in-laws on the allegation of demanding dowry and the petitioner's husband has fallen the AIDS [Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome], since the petitioner's husband had illegal relationship with other women. Thereafter, they got separated and the petitioner/wife filed a Original Petition in F.C.O.P.No.284 of 2005 as against her husband and to dissolve her marriage on the ground of cruelty and the order of amicable settlement passed by the learned Family Court Judge, Salem, dated 19.12.2007. The petitioner has also filed another G.O.P.No.204 of 2005 for the custody of minor son viz., Bommana Sivaraman and another suit has been filed for partition in O.S.No.77 of 2006 on the file of the Fast Track Court - I, Salem.

(3.) Based upon the amicable settlement between them, the Memorandum of Understanding entered into between them and as per Memorandum of Understanding out of seven properties were belonged to her husband, only one property was allotted to her minor son by way of gift deed settlement in respect of O.S.No.77 of 2006 and thereafter, decree of divorce has been granted by way of mutual consent in respect of O.P.No.9 of 2007 and a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- was given for full and final settlement of permanent alimony to the petitioner. Further, it has been agreed by the petitioner's husband and father-in-law viz., the respondent herein to deposit a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- in the name of her minor son for the welfare his educational expenses. A common order has been passed by the Tamil Nadu Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Bench No.II, Salem District in M.C.No.426 of 2007, dated 01.09.2007 and all the suits have been disposed of by an order dated 01.09.2007. Thereafter, for the purpose of her minor son's educational expenses to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/- as Tuition Fees etc the petitioner had withdrawn. In fact, before decree of divorce, the petitioner had already been spent of Rs.3,50,000/- towards medical expenses of her husband. Therefore, the petitioner had withdrawn the amount of Rs.9,00,000/- after one year of the deposit. Thereafter, the petitioner has also got married with another one person viz., Raja, as such, the respondent/defacto complainant only with an intention to spoil the petitioner's marriage and the false complaint has been lodged before the Inspector of Police, Kondalampatti Police Station on 04.07.2011. Thereby, the respondent threatened the petitioner to repay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and the same was received by her in respect of permanent alimony and also threatened her to repay the amount of Rs.9,00,000/- which was deposited in her son's name. Based upon the amicable settlement between the respondent and the petitioner, the above said complaint was closed on 09.07.2011 and the petitioner re-conveyed the property and also handed over the original documents and returned the sum of Rs.9,00,000/- to the respondent/defacto complainant herein. Even then, the present impugned complaint filed under Section 200 CrPC., on the allegation that the petitioner misappropriated the money belonging to her own son and cheated the respondent/defacto complainant. In the meanwhile, the learned Judicial Magistrate-V, without considering the offences have taken the cognizance offence under Section 406 IPC in C.C.No.212 of 2012. Hence, the petitioner sought for quashing the private complaint.