CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness

No Ground to Quash Proceedings Against Accused in Assault and Harassment Case: Madras High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgement, the Madras High Court, presided by Justice M. Dhandapani, refused to quash proceedings against Sumathi, the petitioner in the criminal case Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 16177 of 2022. The case, involving allegations under the Indian Penal Code and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, will proceed to trial.

The Court dealt with a petition to quash criminal proceedings involving charges of assault and harassment. Key legal questions involved the application of sections 294(b), 324, 323, 506(ii) of the IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002.

The prosecution alleged that Sumathi was involved in an illegal relationship with the complainant's husband and assaulted the complainant. The petitioner sought to quash these proceedings, alleging that the case was false and lacked specific allegations against her.

The Court, after considering the submissions, found sufficient material to proceed with the trial. Citing the decision in State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal (1992 SCC (Crl.) 426), the Court emphasized the importance of a trial to determine the veracity of the allegations. The petitioner's plea for quashing the charges was declined, underscoring the need for trial to assess the charges properly.

Justice Dhandapani stated, “The petitioner cannot be let off by quashing the charges against her as that would completely undermine the alleged act, which is the subject matter of criminal trial pending against her.”

The Court also addressed the concern regarding the petitioner’s personal appearance, dispensing with it except on specific occasions, such as receiving copies of proceedings, framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and the pronouncement of judgment.

Decision: The petition to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner was dismissed, affirming the necessity of a trial to adjudicate the allegations. The connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed.

Date of Decision: 11.03.2024.

Sumathi Vs. State through The Inspector of Police, Rameshwaram Town Police Station & Anr.

 

Latest Legal News