IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03.08.2009 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN Crl.O.P.No.16738 of 2007 and M.P.No.1 of 2007 1. D. Raja 2. Kanaka 3. Naveena .. Petitioners Versus Karthikeyan .. Respondent Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No.112 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri and quash the same. For Petitioners : M/s. C. Prabakaran For Respondent : No appearance O R D E R The petitioners have filed the above Criminal Original Petition to call for the records relating to the proceedings in C.C.No.112 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri and quash the same. 2. The respondent/complainant's case is that the respondent married the daughter of the first and second accused. The brother of the first accused suggested the respondent to marry the daughter of one Mr. Shakti, but due to the mismatch of horoscope, the respondent married the daughter of the first and second accused. So, the said Shakti instigated the accused 1 to 2 to degrade the respondent's family. The complainant's brother Bhaskaran filed a case against the said Shakti in C.C.No.152 of 2001. Subsequently, the matter was settled. The complainant was leading his married life, peacefully, with the daughter of the first and second accused. The accused 1 and 2 have given ill-advice to their daughter, Shobana, who is the wife https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of the respondent herein, stating that as per accused 1 & 2's advice, they should lead their life else their lives will be disturbed. Thereafter, on 11.09.2006 and 28.11.2006, the accused persons, came along with some rowdy elements and abused the respondent. The respondent's wife lodged a complaint before the All Women Wing Police Station, Dharmapuri on 29.11.2006. Again, on 04.12.2006, the accused persons came along with some rowdy elements and used abusive language against the respondent and his family members. After this disgrace caused by the accused persons, the neighbours terminated their relationship with the respondent and his family. So, the aggrieved respondent filed the complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri. Along with the complaint, seven documents have been filed and 11 witnesses have been mentioned. 3. The learned Magistrate has taken the case on his file as C.C.No.112 of 2007. 4. The petitioners have challenged the said C.C.No.112 of 2007 through their quash petition in Criminal Original Petition No.16738 of 2007. The petitioners/accused have submitted that the complainant is none other than the son-in-law of the third petitioner. The complainant married the daughter of the first and second petitioner. Further, the petitioners contended that the complainant is in the habit of making complaints against the petitioners family. So, the petitioners are adjusting themselves and tolerating all the hardship, troubles and all sorts of harassment caused by the complainant. 5. The petitioners submit that the present complaint is a frivolous and vexatious one. The third petitioner, being a student of a computer institute, is attending his classes and concentrating on her studies. Further, the sworn statement of the complainant is contradictory to the statements of witnesses 2 and 3. The witnesses are very close friends of the complainant. Further, the petitioners are in no way connected with the said offence. 6. Considering the contends of the complaint, deposition of the witnesses, sworn statements of the complainant, contents of the petition and arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Court is of the view that the petitioners and the respondent are related to each other, ie., the respondent is the son-in-law of the first and second petitioners herein. The case of the complainant does not have any serious allegations or merits. Further, if such a frivolous case having no solid grounds is taken up by a trial court, it will be a waste of valuable court time / public time. 7. Hence, the Court is warranted to interfere with the proceedings in C.C.No.112 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri and the same has got to be quashed. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar mra To 1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dharmapuri. 2. -do Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharmapuri. +1 cc to Mr.C.Prabakaran, Advocate, SR.No.34109 +1 cc to M/s.Sree and Associates, Advocate, SR.No.34145 Crl.O.P.No.16738 of 2007 and M.P.No.1 of 2007 BVN {CO} TP/26.8.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/