ORDER

This petition is filed to call for the records in C.C.No.3421 of 2016 on the file of 5th Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and to quash the same.

2. C.C.No.3421 of 2016 was filed under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., for the offence under Section 500 IPC. The respondent filed a private complaint alleging that she is working in Selvarangam Hospital as a Nurse. She is married and has two female children aged 17 and 14 years, studying in XII Standard and IX Standard respectively, at Valliammal Girls Higher Secondary School, Annanagar, Chennai. She is a head Nurse of Selvarangam Hospital and staying in Nurses Quarters belonging to Selvarangam Hospital with her children. In July 2015, a woman constable from All Women Police Station from Annanagar, came to nurses' quarters and called her to police station for enquiry. On visiting the police station, she was asked several questions linking her with Dr.Selvakumar, Proprietor of Selvarangam Hospital. Then, she found that petitioner lodged a complaint against her husband alleging among other things that Dr.Selvakumar, developed intimacy with respondent. Her son Siddath saw respondent and her husband meeting secretly in her in-law's house. Her sister's husband Balasubramani had also seen both of them in her in-law's house. This complaint was in English and it was read over by Kandhasamy and translated to her in Tamil. Police came to Nurses' quarters and enquired the nurses on these allegations. The allegations made against the respondent by the petitioner is absolutely false. She had only professional communication with Dr.Selvakumar, in her capacity as nurse. The allegations made against her caused willful imputation against her, attacking her character. Respondent felt very low and humiliated. The reputation was lowered in the eyes of society. She has two grownup daughters, and these allegations not only affected her reputation but her childrens' welfare. It is a slanderous allegation against her husband as well. The imputation of unchastity and adultery are made directly against the respondent without any basis. Therefore, the complaint for the offence under Section 500 IPC. Challenging this complaint, this quash petition is filed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had given a complaint against her husband in response to a complaint lodged by her husband. The allegations made in the complaint given to the police cannot form basis for filing of defamation case when the complaint is pending enquiry. The filing of defamation case is misconceived and it is an attempt to arm twist the petitioner at the machination of Selvakumar. Petitioner had not caused any publication and therefore, provision of Section 499 is not attracted. Thus, he prayed for quashing the proceedings. In support of his submission, he drew the attention of this Court to the following judgments:

i). 2020 SCC OnLine Mad 1398 ( Babu E. v. S.Ramesh ), it is observed as follows:

"11. The respondent is referred as 'Theif' in the complaint and hence, he has been defamed is on a wrong premise. The complaint given to the police authorities by the petitioner is for his grievance, for which he had narrated certain aspects as he perceived. The police authorities on enquiry closed and dropped the complaint which alone would not prove the fact the imputations were motivated with malice, per se defamatory. Further, there is no material to show that the defamatory words shown in the complaint were publicised and due to the publication, harm was caused to the respondent's reputation, directly or indirectly in the estimation of others. In absence of such averments and materials in the complaint, this Court finds that the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law."

ii) (1999) 3 Supreme Court Cases 134 ( Rajendra Kumar Sitaram Pande and Others Vs. Uttam and Another ), it is observed as follows:-

"The gravamen of the allegations in the complaint petition is