Angaline Diana v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The prayer in the Criminal Original Petition is to quash the proceedings in STC.No.2267 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-II, Puducherry.

¶2A perusal of the first information report, the materials collected during the course of investigation and the final report, it can be seen that the petitioners in this criminal original petition are the daughter and son-in-law of the second respondent herein. The second respondent has lodged a complaint as if being the mother, she is entitled for the property, she has stored her things in one room and, originally when the daughter and the son-in-law were permitted to reside in the house, they have closed the room and after knocking the door, her grand daughter opened the door of the particular room with much reluctance and in anger. When she confronted, the grand daughter by accident fell down and upon seeing the same, her daughter and son-in-law attacked her and also abused her in filthy language and as such, she made a complaint and a case was Page3 of 8 Crime No.119 of 2024 for alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) r/w. Section 3(5) of BNS.

¶3With reference to the very same incident, the daughter has also given a complaint stating that it is the mother, who aggressively attacked the daughter and also the grandchild and accordingly, a case in Crime No.118 of 2024 was also registered for the alleged offences under section 296, 115(2) and 351(2) of BNS. It is seen that after investigation, a final report is filed finding the exact version of both the mother and the daughter as true and the cases are taken on file as STC.No.2267 of 2024 and STC No.2930 of 2024 and both are pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry.

¶4In these kind of matters, when two versions of the same incident is given by both sides, the purpose of investigation is to find out as to which version is correct and lay the final version before the Court, after finding out the truth. In the instant case, the respondent Police has verbatim found truth in both the versions and filed final report before the Court of law as such, both the final reports are not sustainable. In some of the cases, while exercising the power, this Court has ordered further investigation and had set right by directing the respondent Police to investigate further and to find out the correct version by taking into consideration who was the aggressor and who was the defender. Such a course need not be undertaken in this case, considering the relationship Page4 of 8 between the parties i.e., mother and the daughter and further, the matter is now said to be pending before the civil Court in O.S.No. 704 of 2024. Therefore, the parties can ultimately abide by the outcome in the civil Court.

¶5Even though the petition is filed only to quash the proceedings in STC.No.2267 of 2024, the learned counsel for the second respondent submits that the criminal original petition filed by him to quash the other STC No.2930 of 2024 is yet to be numbered. Considering the nature of the ground, on which, this Court is granting relief, both the cases deserve to be quashed.

¶6In view thereof, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. The final report in STC No.2267 of 2024 and the other STC.No.2930 of 2024 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry shall stand quashed. The parties shall be bound by the judgment of the civil Court that will be rendered ultimately in the matter. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 06-08-2026 KKN Page5 of 8 To

¶1The Inspector Of Police, Odiamsalai Police Station. Puducherry.

¶2The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. CRLoOPoNo.o33194oofo2025 D.BHARATHAoCHAKRAVARTHY,oJ. KKN CRLoOPoNo.o33194oofo2025 06-08-2026 Page6oofo8 Crl.O.P.No.33194 of 2025 Crl.O.P.No.33194 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.23172 of 2025

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Today, this matter is listed under the caption "For being Mentioned".

¶2It is seen that the following errors have crept in the order, dated

06.08.2026, with reference to the description of STC Numbers:-

i) In paragraph no.1 of the order, the year pertaining to STC No.2267 of 2025 and STC No.2930 of 2025 have been inadvertently mentioned as 2024 instead of 2025 which has got reflected in para 3, 5 & 6 as well and therefore, the same shall be replaced as STC.No.2267 of 2025 and STC No.2930 of 2025.

ii) In paragraphs nos.3 & 6, in respect of the sentence both are pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry, the same shall be replaced by stating that pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Puducherry and the Judicial Magistrate, Mahila Court, Puducherry respectively.

¶3Registry is directed to make necessary corrections in the aforesaid order and issue fresh order copy to the parties.

19.08.2026 NHS Crl.O.P.No.33194 of 2025

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Nhs

Crl.O.P.No.33194 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.23172 of 2025

19.08.2026

Page1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and Crl.MP.No. 23172 of 2025 1. Angeline Diana, W/o.Rajakumar, No.160, Puducherry Nagar Main Road, Govindasalai, Puducherry. 2. Rajakumar, S/o.Ganesan, No.160, Puducherry Nagar Main Road, Govindasalai, Puducherry. Both are represented by their power of attorney Rajakumar V S/o, Vinayagam,(37 years), No.10, Mooventhar Street, Mullai Nagar Extension, Orleanpet, Nellithoppe, Puducherry - 605 005. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Odiamsalai Police Station. Puducherry. 2. Amalopavam, W/o.Velu, No.160, Puducherry Nagar Main Road, Govindasalai, Puducherry. ..Respondent(s) Page2 of 8 Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records in STC.No.2267 of 2024 on the file of Judicial Magistrate-II, Puducherry and QUASH the same as illegal. For Petitioner(s): Mr.R. Sankarasubbu For Respondent(s): Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor (Puducherry ) for R1 Mr.A.K.Anand for R2