Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Dr Justice G. JAYACHANDRAN
R.RADHA – Appellant
Versus
INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent
Criminal - Quashing FIR - IPC Sections 294(b), 324, 506(ii), Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act 2002 - Court upheld investigation based on prima facie evidence of bodily injury.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks to quash an FIR relating to a dispute between two families, involving prior quarrels and pending civil litigation. The petitioner alleges the FIR was registered belatedly and is a misuse of criminal law.
Issues: Whether the FIR should be quashed considering the ongoing civil dispute and alleged delay in registration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the severity of injuries cannot be overlooked, and appropriate criminal proceedings may be warranted irrespective of the civil nature of underlying disputes.
Final Decision: The petition to quash the FIR is dismissed.
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the FIR in Cr.No.348 of 2023 registered by the first respondent police on
05.08.2023 in connection with alleged incident occurred on 28.07.2023.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is a dispute between the family members of Shankar and Ramesh Babu. Earlier on 02.08.2022, both quarrelled with each other and the respondent police registered the complaint in C.S.R.Nos.281 and 282 of 2022 respectively. Later, the same were closed. Again, there was fight between them on 23.07.2023. In this connection, the petitioner gave the complaint against Vijayalakshmi and others. The respondent police had not registered the complaint contrarily and they have registered the complaint given by Vijayalakshmi reporting incident belatedly. The learned counsel also submitted that regarding the property, there is civil suit is pending, but the second respondent is trying to give criminal colour to the dispute.
3. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent on getting instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that the fight between the two families is in-respect of a property but however, having information received about commission of a cognizable offence, they have registered the case for the offence under Sections 294(b), 324, 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act , 2002 and the same is under investigation. As far as earlier complaints are concerned, they were enquired and closed as civil dispute. Whereas in this case, since the injury alleged to have been caused with iron rod been supported by medical evidence, the respondent police has taken up the complaint and investigating the same.
4. This Court on perusing the records and hearing the submissions of the counsel find that it is a case where primafacie material available to registered the case and investigate. The injuries sustained by the defacto complainant cannot be ignored, just because the parties are fighting with a civil dispute regarding the property. Hence, the Petition to quash the FIR stands dismissed.
5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
Consequently,the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
15.07.2024 Vv To
1. The Inspector of Police, Vaduvur Police Station, Thiruvarur District.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
Vv and Crl.MP.No.2048 of 2024
15.07.2024
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
