O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred challenging the order of the learned Sub Judge, Poonamallee, Chennai, dated 21.06.2022 made in unnumbered I.A.(SR)No.8235 of 2022 in H.M.O.P.No.483 of 2018 and also seeking direction to take the petition on file and decide it on merits.

2. The revision petitioner is the wife, against whom the first respondent/husband has filed a Original Petition in H.M.O.P.No.483 of 2018 for seeking the relief of dissolution of marriage. After the disposal of the said petition, a petition was filed under Section 340 r/w 195 Cr.P.C., to initiate action against the respondents for producing false evidence and thus interfering in the administration of justice. The said petition was rejected by the learned Sub Judge, Poonamallee, Chennai. Aggrieved over that, the petitioner/wife has filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that the averments in the pleadings submitted by the first respondent during the proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.483 of 2018 has caused fear in the minds of the petitioner and because of that effective participation of the revision petitioner is prevented. By making such allegations, a petition under Section 340 r/w 195 Cr.P.C. was filed seeking permission for taking action against the respondents for committing the offences of criminal intimidation and interference in the administration of justice.

4. It is to be seen whether the sanction under Section 340 r/w 195 Cr.P.C. can be granted for producing certain materials before the Court. If the materials are put to test during the course of trial and if the learned trial Judge finds it to be false, then only there can be any scope for initiating the proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. But the allegation of the petitioner in her affidavit is that the first respondent has made defamatory allegations in his counter and that had caused fear in the minds of the petitioner.

5. It is further alleged that the first respondent has given false defamatory complaint against the petitioner, her father and her elder brother. In fact, C.C.No.66 of 2021 was also pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur in this regard. When the main proceedings are still pending, the petition filed under Section 340 Cr.P.C. can only be a prematured one. Without a finding of the Court with regard to the genuineness of documents produced during enquiry no action can be initiated under Section 340 Cr.P.C.

6. The learned trial Judge has rightly held that the anxiety or fear in the minds of the petitioner on seeing the counter filed by the first respondent cannot be the reason to invoke the powers under Section 340 Cr.P.C. Whenever an application is admitted to file, the petitioner should establish the prima facie eligibility of the petition to get admitted. After admission of the petition, the merits will be decided after a thorough enquiry. If the materials produced before the Court does not disclose a prima facie reasons for initiating the proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C., the Court need not admit the petition.

7. Since the revision petitioner has stated her state of mind on seeing the counter alone as the prima facie material, the learned trial Judge had chosen to reject the petition at the threshold itself without admitting it. The learned trial Judge has dealt the issue correctly and I do not find any ground for interference.

8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed and the order dated 21.06.2022 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Poonamallee, Chennai in unnumbered I.A.(SR)No.8235 of 2022 in H.M.O.P.No.483 of

2018 is hereby confirmed. No costs.

18.07.2022 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes sri To The Sub Judge, Poonamallee, Chennai.

R .N.MANJULA , J.

sri

18.07.2022