Judgment 1. The petitioners have filed the above Criminal Original Petition to call for the records, pending on the file of the Sub Inspectress of Police, All Women-wing Police Station, Vellore, in Crime No.34 of 2007 and quash the same. 2. The prosecution case was that one Anjugam, daughter of Varadan lodged a complaint, with the Inspectress of Police, All Women Wing Police Station, Vellore, on 30th May 2007. The said Anjugam is one of partners among the Four partners in Lucky Shoe Company at Vellore. Among the four, Annadurai is also one of the partners. The said Annadurai developed love affairs with the defacto complainant, Anjugam and had sexual relations with her. This fact was revealed to the parents of Anjugam and Annadurai. Thereafter both sides decided to conduct marriage for them. Accordingly, marriage was fixed on 28.05.2007. In the meantime, one Ponnu, relative of Annadurai threatened the said Anjugam not to marry Annadurai. As per marriage scheduled, all the relatives and friends assembled in the marriage hall but the bridegroom Annadurai did not come. The relatives of Annadurai informed that they are not responsible for the absence of bridegroom. Hence, the said Anjugam lodged a complaint with the Inspectress of Police, All-Women Wing Police Station. The said case was registered in Crime No.34 of 2007 on an alleged offence under sections 417, 420 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. 3. The petitioners contention is that they were not responsible for stopping the marriage. Further, they had not given any support to Annadurai/bridegroom. The 1st petitioner is working as Deputy General Manager at B.H.E.L, Tiruchi and the 2nd petitioner is the wife of the 1st petitioner. They are permanent residents of Tiruchi. The petitioners further submitted that as per 161 statement, they are not necessary parties. Likewise, there is no specific proof that the petitioners were instructed in stopping of the marriage, as alleged in the complaint. Their only role, after receiving the wedding invitation, was that they had come over to the kalyana mandapam to attend the ceremony as members of Bridegrooms relatives. At the time of marriage proposal or even prior to that, the petitioners did not have any connection with the defacto complainant, but their name has been falsely implicated in the said complaint. 4. At the time of marriage proposal or even prior to that, the petitioners did not have any connection with the defacto complainant, but their name has been falsely implicated in the said complaint. 4. From the above said facts and circumstances of the case, and arguments of the learned counsels for both the sides, this Court decides to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.34 of 2007 on the file of the respondent police, Vellore. Accordingly, the quash petition in Criminal Original Petition No.19164 of 2007 is allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.