ORDER

This petition is filed to quash charge sheet passed in C.C.No.642 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli.

2.According to the petitioner, the second respondent had lodged a false complaint against the petitioner before the first respondent and the first respondent registered a case in Crime No.331 of 2018 and thereafter, filed final report for the offence under Sections 294(b), 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and Section 67 of Information Technology Act and the same was taken on file as C.C.No.642 of

2019.

3.As per prosecution case, on 30.10.2018, while the second respondent was having telephonic conversion, the petitioner approached her and introduced himself as an advocate and told her that he knew the second respondent for 1½ years and the petitioner continued to speak to the second respondent through cell phone and even though the second respondent did not like the petitioner, the petitioner kept on talking to her. On 22.11.2018, the petitioner abused her in filthy language and on 08.12.2018 at about 06.30p.m., when the second respondent along with the family members near a park, the petitioner came there in his car and got down and abused in filthy language and when the father and brother-in-law of the second respondent came there, the petitioner left the place of occurrence and also criminally intimidated the second respondent. In fact no such offence has happened as alleged in the complaint and the final report. In fact an estranged love affair between the petitioner and the second respondent. The second respondent has been maliciously given a criminal color at the instigation of the second respondent's father, who is not practicing advocate. The second respondent suppressed the real fact that she had often visited the petitioner in his office and spent more time with the petitioner and his parents. The date of alleged occurrence is 08.12.2018. But the complaint was given on 11.12.2018. The allegations are vague and will not constitute any offence. But the first respondent without conducting the proper investigation filed final report. Hence the charge sheet is liable to be quashed.

4.No counter was filed by the respondents.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the second respondent gave a complaint against the petitioner before the first respondent. The first respondent registered a case in Crime No.331 of 2018 and thereafter, without conducting proper investigation, the first respondent filed final report and the same is taken on file as C.C.No.642 of 2019. In fact, the petitioner and the second respondent loved each other and due to the instigation of father of the second respondent, this false complaint has been lodged by the defacto complainant. Even according to the allegations of the complaint, no offence is made out and the allegations as against the petitioner are vague allegations and therefore, the registration of FIR itself is abuse of process of law and further the first respondent without conducting proper investigation mechanically filed final report. Hence, the charge sheet is liable to be set aside.

6.The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent and the learned Government Advocate have contended that the petitioner abused the obscene words and threatened the defacto complainant and thereby, she gave a complaint before the first respondent and FIR in Crime No.331 of 2018 registered and thereafter, the first respondent investigated the case and filed final report. As per investigation and final report, prima facie materials available to proceed with the case and thereby, the learned Magistrate had taken the case on file in C.C.No.642 of 2019 and the case is pending for further adjudication. At this stage there is no valid ground to quash the C.C. Proceedings. The grounds raised by the petitioner are defence and the same can be raised before the trial Court and this is matter of trial