SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Mad) 2066

P.N.PRAKASH
Ilangovan – Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:M. Vijaya Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent: C. Emalias, Addl. Public Prosecutor.

Judgment :-

1. Seeking to quash the amended charge sheet filed in SC.No.121 of 2014 on the file of the Mahila Court, Chennai.

2. Heard Mr.M.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Emalias, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

3. The 1st accused who is the petitioner herein is seeking to quash the amended final report that has been filed by the respondent police, pursuant to a direction from this Court for further investigation under Section 173[a] Cr.P.C. It may be necessary to narrate the brief history of the case. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their name.

4. Ilangovan [petitioner/1st accused] got married to Loganayagi [defacto complainant] on 13.06.1985. It is alleged by Loganayagi that her husband and his relatives demanded more and more dowry from her and subjected her to untold cruelty. It is alleged by Loganayagi that on 26.03.1992, Ilangovan approached her in the guise of wanting to have sex with her and he caused tear to her private part with a blade.

5. It may be relevant to state that no complaint was lodged by Loganayagi immediately. After Ilangovan filed a petition for divorce, Loganayagi lodg













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top