The court emphasized the importance of considering malafide complaints and the principle of quashing FIR in cases of malafide intention.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside the order dated 09.11.2022 made in C.M.P.No.880 of 2022 in Spl.S.C.No.2 of 2022 on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur.)

1. Challenging the impugned order dated 09.11.2022 passed in C.M.P.No.880 of 2022 in Spl.S.C.No.2 of 2022 by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur, the present criminal revision case is filed.

2. The fact of the case is that the petitioner is an accused in Spl.S.C.No.2 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Tiruppur. The petitioner was working as Principal in AVP College of Arts and Science College, Chettipalayam, Thirumuguran Poondi, Tiruppur. There is a dispute between the petitioner and the management. The petitioner had filed many writ petitions against the management with regard to the salary and removal from service. The management also filed a complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner in FIR No. 421 of 2021 and this petitioner also gave a complaint, a case has been registered in FIR No.422 of 2021.

3. In the present case, based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the respondent police registered a case against this petitioner in Crime No.1272 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 294(b), 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 on 29.06.2021. The respondent police, after investigation, filed the final report under Sections 506(i) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 r/w under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015, which is taken on file in Spl.S.C.No.02 of 2022. In the present case, in the alleged FIR No.1272 of 2021, the alleged incident had taken place in three different dates i.e. 31.12.2020, 02.03.2021 and 30.04.2021. Since the petitioner has not committed any offence as stated by the defacto complainant and the complaint being a false complaint, the petitioner filed a petition in C.M.P.No.880 of 2022 to discharging him from the criminal proceedings. The trial Court dismissed the petition as there is a prima facie case and full fledged trial is required to go into details of the fact alleged by the petitioner/accused, which is under chellange.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent police had registered the FIR initially for the offences under Sections 294(b), 506(i) and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 on 29.06.2021. Subsequently, at the instigation of the management getting further statement from the defacto complainant, included the offences under Sections 3(1) (r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. There was no crime committed by the petitioner as stated by the defacto complainant. The petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.8304 of 2021 against the relieving order issued by the management and thereafter, they reached compromise. In order to punish the petitioner, the management influenced the defacto complainant to file this false complaint on 29.06.2021 for the incident took place on 31.12.2020. Further, in the complaint, it is stated that the incident took place at the principal room and the principal room is not a public place. Therefore, no offence is committed under SC/ST Act. The petitioner has not used any words abusing the defacto complainant’s caste and the initial complaint did not contain any allegation. It is only a subsequent development. The statements are prepared by the police in the police station. There is no material to show any offence committed by the petitioner for framing a charge. There is no prima facie material to proceed against him, hence, the impugned order has to be set aside and the petitioner has to be discharged from the criminal proceedings.

5. The learned Govt.Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first and second respondents supported the impugned order passed by the trial Court an