S. Muralidhar, J.

1. The prayer in this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) is for the quashing of the Complaint Case No. 1800/1 titled Vandana v. Puneet Kumar pending in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) and all proceedings consequent thereto including the summoning order dated 6th October 2007.

2. The petitioner is the nandoi of the complainant, i.e., the husband of the sister of the complainants husband. He is a member of the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) in the Kerala cadre. He is presently posted as Agricultural Secretary in the Government of Kerala. The petitioner avers that the marriage of the petitioners wife brother with the Respondent No. 1 Vandana was solemnized in February 2002. A few months thereafter differences arose between the Respondent No. 1 and her husband. Consequently, she left the matrimonial home and began living with her parents. On 10th April 2003, the Respondent No. 1 got registered FIR No. 263 of 2003 at Police Station (P.S.) Rajouri Garden under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC against her husband, in-laws as well as the petitioner and his wife. That FIR in turn led to a fling of series of further complaints by the Respondent No. 1. A total of nine criminal cases have been filed by the Respondent No. 1 against her husband, in- laws and the petitioner.

3. As far as the present case is concerned, a warrant was issued in FIR No. 263/2003 for search of the petitioners house. Pursuant thereto on 1st September 2003 at about 5.50 p.m. the Respondent No. 1 along with the Investigating Officer (IO) Smt. Kamlesh attached to P.S. Rajouri Garden along with two police constables went to the house of the petitioner at D-1, M.S. Apartments, Tilak Lane. The allegation by the Respondent No. 1 is that during the search, which went on till about 9 pm, when she was alone in one of the bed rooms in the said premises, the petitioner entered the room. At that time the back of Respondent No. 1was towards the petitioner. According to Respondent No. 1, the petitioner slapped her buttock, abused her in a filthy language and caught hold of her shirt from the front. When in order to save herself Respondent No. 1 moved back, her chunni was removed from her body and the petitioner prevented her from proceedings towards the door. Upon Respondent No. 1 raising an alarm, IO Kamlesh came there and thereafter the petitioner moved away.

4. According to Respondent No. 1, she along with IO Kamlesh went to the P.S. Tilak Marg and lodged a complaint at 9.30 p.m. on 1st September 2003 about the above incident. However, no action was taken by the police. Therefore on 9th October 2003 she filed the aforementioned complaint in the court of the learned MM. The said complaint was accompanied by an application under Section 156(3) CrPC for a direction to the police to register an FIR and investigate the case. By an order dated 14th October 2003 a direction was issued by the learned MM to the SHO, P.S. Tilak Marg to register the case in accordance with law and submit a status or final report by 17th December 2003. This led to the registration of FIR No. 466 of 2003 at P.S. Tilak Marg followed by an investigation.

.5. On 16th December 2003, the SHO Tilak Marg submitted a cancellation report in the court of the learned MM stating that no cognizable offence under Sections 354/509/34 IPC was made out and that it would be of no use to further continue the investigation. The Respondent No. 1 filed her objection to the cancellation report. On 9th July 2004 the learned MM passed an order listing the complaint on 4th November 2004 for the evidence of the complainant. In the said order the learned MM observed that he had perused the file including the protest petition and the material on record and in view of which, finding it expedient in the interest of justice complainant is being afforded opportunity to lead her evidence-

6. The complainant/Respondent No. 1 examined herself as CW1, Vijay A