ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.32 of 2021, on the file of Judicial Magistrate - II, Kallakurichi District and quash the same and allowing the original petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Govt. Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the 1^st respondent..

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.02.2020 at about 9 a.m., while the 2^nd respondent was proceeding near her son in law's house, the petitioners, on account of previous enimity, attacked her and scolded her in a filthy language and also threatened her with dire consequences. Due to the act of the petitioners, she sustained injuries and was taken to hospital for treatment. Hence a complaint was lodged against the petitioners and the same was registered in Crime No.52 of 2020 on 15.02.202 under sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2022 and the same has been taken cognizance in C.C.No. 32 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Kallakuruchi.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is already a civil suit pending between the petitioners and the 2^nd respondent, due to which, a false complaint has been foisted against the petitioners. The petitioners did not commit any alleged offence mentoned in the charge sheet and hence they cannot be subjected for any ordeal of trial. Therefore, he prays for quashing C.C.No.32 of 2021 pending before the trial court. 5. On perusal of the statement recorded under section 161 (3) of Cr.P.C., it reveals that there are specific allegations as against the petitioners which attracts the ingredients of the offences under sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2022.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment reported in

2019 (4) SCC 351 in the case of Devendra Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Anr., (Crl.A.No.579 of 2019 dated 02.04.2019) while dealing with the petition to quash the entire criminal proceedings held that the High Courts have no jurisdiction to appreciate the statement of the witnesses and record a finding that there were inconsistencies in their statements and therefore, there was no prima facie case made out as against the accused. It could be done only by the trial Court while deciding the issues on the merits or/and by the Appellate Court while deciding the appeal arising out of the final order that the charge sheet has been laid on the basis of the inconsistency statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C./180 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. (any one)

7. Fruther, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment reported in 2019 (10) SCC 686 in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Arvind Khanna, (Crl.A.No.1572 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019) held that the High Courts cannot record the findings on the disputed facts. The defence of the accused is to be tested after appreciation of evidence by the trial Court during the trial. Therfore, this Court has no power to consider the disputed facts under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.(any one).

8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in another judgment dated

02.12.2019 passed in Crl.A.No.1817 of 2019 in the case of M.Jayanthi Vs. K.R.Meenakshi & anr, held that while considering the petition for quashment of complaint or charge sheet, the Court should not embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the evidence available. All that the Court should see is as to whether there are allegations in the complaint which form the basis for the ingredients that consititue certain offences complained of. Further, the Court can also see whether the preconditions requisite for taking cognizance have been complied with or not and whether the allegations contained in the complaint, even if accepted in entirety, would not consititue the offence alleged. Whet