Criminal proceedings may be quashed under S. 482 of the CrPC when the FIR and charge sheet contain no specific allegations or evidence of criminal intent or acts against the accused, rendering the prosecution an abuse of the judicial process.

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR registered in Crime No.3 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage between A1 and the second respondent was solemnized on 29.04.2018. At the time of marriage, the second respondent was presented with 120 sovereigns of gold jewels and a car. After the marriage, A1, under the influence of alcohol, assaulted and abused the second respondent, demanded additional dowry and caused burn injuries to her with a lit cigarette. The petitioners failed to intervene and instead, advised the second respondent to adjust with A1. It is further alleged that the marriage was arranged based on the false representation that A1 was employed as a Second Officer in a ship and that A1 maintained illicit relationship with multiple women. According to the prosecution, the second respondent was also threatened by the petitioners when she attempted to disclose the harassment suffered by her. Finally, on 24.12.2018, A1, while under the influence of alcohol along with his friends, drove out the second respondent from the matrimonial home.

3. On receipt of the said complaint, the first respondent registered an FIR in Crime No.3 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b)

and 506(i) of IPC.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that there are totally four accused, in which the petitioners are arrayed as A2 and A3. The husband of the second respondent is arrayed as A1 and sister of the first accused is arrayed as A4. Even in the complaint lodged by the second respondent, there are no specific or direct allegations against the petitioners, who are being the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the second respondent herein. While the first accused harassed the second respondent and also demanded dowry, the same was informed to the petitioners, in which, the petitioners stated that whatever the demand made by the first accused, the second respondent should comply with the demands made by A1. Therefore, there are no direct allegations against the petitioners with regard to any demand for dowry. Further, whatever the torture given by the first accused was informed to the petitioners, in which they did not take any action against the first accused.

5. Pursuant to the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Immediately, after being released on bail, A1 committed suicide only because of the registration of the FIR as against the family members. The second respondent has since remarried and gave birth to a child. While pending investigation, the entire jewels and other articles were already handed over to the second respondent and it was duly acknowledged by her.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted that the allegations made against the petitioners to attract the offences under Sections 498(A), 406, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC. Further, the petitioners had demanded dowry from the second respondent and also tortured her. Though the second respondent got second marriage, the entire criminal proceedings would not abate.

7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent submitted that the investigation has already been completed and a final report has been filed, which has been taken cognizance in C.C.No.48 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee. Therefore, the challenge to the registration of the FIR has become infructuous.

8. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either si