SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 44989

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J
C.R.Shai Mrithun – Appellant
Versus
S.Divya – Respondent
Crl.O.P.Nos. 24864 of 2017|17674 of 2018|6214 of 2018|Crl.R.C.Nos.323 of 2018|1320 of 2017



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.Balasubramaniam, P.Mani
For the Respondents: P.Mani, A.Gopinath, Su.Srinivasan, K.Balasubramaniam

Criminal proceedings arising from matrimonial disputes can be quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC if they are found to be malicious, vague, lacking in specific allegations, or initiated as a counterblast to pending matrimonial litigation, thereby constituting an abuse of the judicial process.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - S. 482 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Matrimonial dispute - Allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment raised only after initiation of divorce proceedings - Failure to substantiate claims - Absence of specific overt acts or prima facie evidence - Proceedings constitute abuse of process. (Paras 12, 13, 21, 23)

(B) Penal Code, 1860 - S. 294(b) and S. 506(ii) - Obscene acts - Threatening - Essential ingredients - Mere utterance of words not sufficient without proof of annoyance or real threat - Absence of specific allegations as to time, place, and impact of utterances renders charge untenable. (Paras 17, 18, 19, 20)

(C) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Maintenance - Subsequent remarriage and professional qualification of wife - Divorce granted on ground of cruelty by husband - Set aside order directing maintenance. (Paras 9, 10, 11)

Facts of the case:
Following marriage in 2012, parties separated after three months with mutual allegations of cruelty. The husband initiated divorce proceedings. Subsequently, the wife filed various complaints under the IPC, Dowry Prohibition Act, and the Domestic Violence Act. These petitions challenge the maintenance order and seek to quash the criminal proceedings arising from the matrimonial discord.

Findings of Court:
The Court observed that the criminal complaints were initiated as a counterblast to the divorce proceedings and lacked specific allegations of cruelty or dowry demand. Finding the proceedings to be an abuse of process and noting the wife's remarriage, the Court allowed the petitions to quash the criminal cases and set aside the maintenance order.

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings and maintenance orders against the petitioner should be quashed, and whether the evidence supports the offenses alleged.

Ratio Decidendi: Criminal proceedings instituted purely as a counterblast to matrimonial proceedings without specific pleading or evidence constitute an abuse of process of law and are liable to be quashed under Section 482 of CrPC.

Result: Maintenance order set aside; criminal proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. overview of multiple linked criminal petitions arising from matrimonial conflict. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. setting aside maintenance due to remarriage and proven cruelty. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
3. quashing criminal cases lacking specific cruelty allegations. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. requirements to prove offenses under sections 294(b) and 506(i) ipc. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
5. quashing proceedings abusive to the legal process. (Para 23 , 24 , 25)

CRL OP No. 24864 of 2017

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in D.V.A.No.20 of 2013 pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirupur and quash the same.

CRL OP No. 17674 of 2018

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.680 of 2014, pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirupur and quash the same.

CRL OP No. 6214 of 2018

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in CC No.1 of 2017, pending on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore and quash the same.

CRL RC No. 323 of 2018

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to M.C.No.33 of 2013 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruppur and set aside the order dated 05.02.2018 by allowing this revision.

CRL RC No. 1320 of 2017

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 and 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the order dated 07.09.2017 passed in C.M.P.No.1496 of 2017 in D.V.A.No.20 of 2013 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate I, Tiruppur and allow this Criminal Revision Petition.

For Petitioners: Mr.K.Balasubramaniam

[Crl.OP.Nos.24864/2017, 17674 & 6214/2018

and Crl.R.C.No.323/2018]

Mr.P.Mani [Crl.RC.No.1320/2017]

For Respondents: Mr.P.Mani [Crl.OP.No.24864/2017]

Mr.A.Gopinath

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1

[Crl.OP.Nos.17674 & 6214/2018]

No appearance for R2 [Crl.OP.No.17674/2018]

Mr.Su.Srinivasan for R2

[Crl.OP.Nos.6214/2018 & Crl.R.C.No.323/2018]

Mr.K.Balasubramaniam [Crl.RC.No.1320/2017]

COMMON ORDER

1. Crl.R.C.No.323 of 2018 has been filed challenging the order dated 05.02.2015 passed in M.C.No.33 of 2013 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruppur, thereby ordering maintenance of Rs.20,000/- payable by the petitioner herein.

2. Crl.O.P.No.1320 of 2017 has been filed challenging the order dated 07.09.2017 passed in CMP No.1496 of 2017 in D.V.A No.20 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruppur, thereby allowing the petition to set aside the ex-parte order dated 14.07.2016.

3. Crl.O.P.No.6214 of 2018 has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2017 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 of IPC and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging that the second respondent got married the first petitioner herein on 11.11.2012. According to the prosecution, even at the time of engagement, all the accused demanded huge dowry and the marriage was solemnized only on the condition to give huge dowry. Thereafter, all the petitioners committed cruelty by demanding huge dowry and had driven out the second respondent from the matrimonial home.

4. Crl.O.No.17674 of 2014 has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.680 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruppur, for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b) and 506(ii) of the IPC. The allegation in the complaint is that on 16.08.2013, when the second respondent and her family members were present in their house, four unknown persons entered into their house and attacked them, as a result of which, they sustained injuries and were taken to the hospital for treatment.

5. Crl.O.P.No.24864 of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top