C OMMON O RDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. These two petitions, one is filed to quash the case against A2

and A3 and another is filed to transfer the trial from XV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, arising out of fact that one Muthukumaran husband of the defacto complainant Jeyanthi who happened to be the petitioner in Crl.O.P. No.15271 of 2020 seeking transfer of case from the file of XV Metropolitan Magistrate Court to file of any other Judicial Magistrate

Court at Tirunelveli District.

3. The sum and substance of defacto complainant Jeyanthi's complaint taken on file for investigation on 28.03.2019 by the All Women Police Station, Royapuram in Crime No. 04 of 2019 is that, the said Muthukumaran is already a married man with one Kanchana Devi, suppressing the facts that the marriage in subsistence through his sister and mother had represented her with Muthukumaran as legally divorced from Kanchan Devi, but having an affair with one Usha, in order to bring him to normal and decent life, they want the hands of the defacto complainant.

4. After much preparation by the second and third accused, the defacto complainant Jeyanthi has consented for the marriage. The marriage was solemnized on 11.07.2018 at Thiruchendur Murugan Temple. Since even after marriage, there was threatening call from the said Usha, the first petitioner herein Radhika Selvi, who was former member of Parliament and Minister of State, had called the said Usha and warned her not to interfere with the life of her brother and the defacto complainant. Despite that, the said threat continues. Radhika Selvi and her mother who are the petitioners herein has forced the defacto complainant to leave the matrimonial home. Hence, this complaint against Muthukumaran, Radhikaselvi, Sister of A1 and Thangapushpam, mother of A1 and Usha, the alleged paramour of A1.

5. The substance of the complaint is inducing the defacto complainant to marriage the first accused by showing fake divorce documents and driving her away from the matrimonial home. After completion of investigation final report filed on 05.11.2019 for alleged offence under Section 417, 420 r/w 495, 506(i) IPC. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Crl.O.P. No.9833 of 2021, who are A2 and A3, submitted that the trial Court on perusing the records had dropped charge under Section 495 IPC and now the petitioners stand charge for offence under Sections 417, 420, 506(i) r/w 109 IPC.

6. Contending that the deviation and embellishments in the FIR,

Section 161 Cr.P.C Statements and the final report coupled with the facts that the Investigation Officer has found fit that there is no offence to attract Section 495 IPC is made out. The only incriminating material against these two petitioners is that the false representation about the first marriage with Kanchana Devi, showing fake divorce decree. To substantiate this, the Investigation Officer has not recovered the said fake divorce decree and as far as the offence under Sections 417 & 420 IPC predominantly, relates to property and in this case admittedly, there is no involvement of any tangible property.

7. Further the learned counsel submitted that the alleged threat is also appears to be made by the first petitioner to said Usha, who was allegedly interfering the life of the defacto complainant and Muthukumaran. The transfer petition filed by the defacto complainant which is taken on file in Crl.O.P. No.15271 of 2020, is on the ground that the first accused Muthukumaran, practicing Advocate at Chennai, tried to interfere the process and being a lady and resident of Thirunelveli District, she apprehends that she may not be able to get justice and difficult to undertake all the way from Thirunelveli to Chennai to attend each and every hearing.

8. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the State submitted that the factum of marriage with the defacto complainant, with a knowledge a