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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
PERUMAL – Appellant
Versus
JANAKI – Respondent
CRL RC 1119/2011



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 19.08.2011

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM

Crl.R.C.No.1119 of 2011

Perumal

..

Petitioner

Vs.

Janaki

..

Respondent

Criminal Revision filed under sections 397 and 401 of Criminal

Procedure Code against the judgment dated 31.08.2010 made in

C.M.P.No.4561 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the Judicial

Magistrate II, Pollachi.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Vadivel Murugan

O R D E R

This petition arises against the dismissal of a complaint

preferred by the petitioner, by the learned Judicial Magistrate II,

Pollachi, under order dated 31.08.2010 in C.M.P.No.4561 of 2010.

2. Pursuant to receipt of a complaint registered in Crime No.18

of 2008 for offence under Sections 417 and 506(i) IPC, an

investigation was conducted. As the de facto complainant had informed

of having become pregnant owing to the wrongful actions of the

petitioner, she was subjected to medical examination. A charge sheet

was filed by the respondent informing commission of offence under

Sections 417 and 506(i) IPC. Therein, it had been stated that the de

facto complainant was pregnant. In the course of trial, the Doctor

who examined the de facto complainant, deposed as PW-5 and informed

that upon his examination, the de facto complainant in the case was

not found to be pregnant. His report of examination was marked as

Ex.P2. The case ended in acquittal. Thereafter, this petitioner has

moved a complaint which came to be dismissed by the Court below under

Section 203 IPC. There against, this revision.

3. This Court finds that the entire case of the

petitioner/complainant complaining of offence under Section 193 IPC is

on the strength of the charge sheet informing that the de facto

complainant was pregnant. While deposing in Court the respondent, in

chief, had stated that the de facto complainant had been sent for

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

medical examination and that the charge sheet had been filed for

offence under Sections 417 and 506(i) IPC pursuant to completion of

investigation. In cross, the respondent had denied that the contents

of the charge sheet informing of the de facto complainant being

pregnant was a figment of her imagination. This Court is in agreement

with the conclusion of the Court below in dismissing the complaint.

The complaint provided very little to take action upon, particularly,

where this Court finds that the respondent had not in any manner

tampered with the medical record so as to mulct the petitioner with

criminal liability. The wording in the final report informing of the

de facto complainant having been pregnant can in the facts and

circumstances of the case, be seen only as a mistake.

4. In the result, the Criminal Revision stands dismissed.

Sd/

Asst.Registrar

/true copy/

Sub Asst.Registrar

gm

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate II,

Pollachi.

2.The Public Prosecutor,

High Court, Madras.

+1cc to Mr.S.Vadivel Murugan, Advocate 51448

SJ(CO)

km/29.8.

Crl.R.C.No.1119 of 2011

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top