ORDER The petitioners have come forward with this petition seeking to call for the records in C.C. No.110 of 2009 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II,Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District and quash the same, stating that the petitioners are facing the charges under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that this petition as against the petitioners Nos. 1 to 3 has already been dismissed as not pressed on 23.12.2009 itself. He further submitted that as far as the fourth petitioner is concerned she is a College student and she has not committed any offence. Furthermore, as per Section 2(a) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998, no woman can be punished for the offence of Women Harassment Act, and that has been decided by this Court in the judgment in Basheer Ahamed and others -vs- State rep.by the Inspector of Police, W 13, All Women Police Station, Washermenpet Circle, Chennai-21 reported in 2006 (4) CTC 374 and hence on this sole ground the fourth petitioner prays for quashing the proceedings in respect of Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. 3. Resisting the same, the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) appearing for the first respondent submitted that the fourth respondent herself field a discharge petition, which is pending before the Court, during the pendency of which she has come forward with this petition. Hence, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) prays for dismissal of the petition. 4. Considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the typed set of papers, it is seen that on the basis of the complaint given by the second respondent, the case has been registered and after due investigation charge sheet has been filed for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) IPC r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. Since the interim stay has been granted by this Court the discharge application has been filed by the petitioners has been pending before the Magistrate Court. Even though this application has been filed by all the accused namely A1 to A4, A1 to A3 have not pressed the petition. Since the interim stay has been granted by this Court the discharge application has been filed by the petitioners has been pending before the Magistrate Court. Even though this application has been filed by all the accused namely A1 to A4, A1 to A3 have not pressed the petition. Now, the arguments advanced only in respect of A4 would submit that A4 is a College going student and no offence has been made under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act, since the petitioner is a woman. So, it is appropriate to incorporate the provisions of Section 2(a) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998, which reads as follows:- Section 2(a)."harassment" means any indecent conduct or act by a man which causes or is likely to cause intimidation, fear, shame or embarrassment, including abusing or causing hurt or nuisance or assault or use of force". In the decision in Basheer Ahamed and others -vs- State rep.by the Inspector of Police, W 13, All Women Police Station, Washermenpet Circle, Chennai-21 referred to supra, in paragraph 9' it was held that there can be no allegation of harassment as against the woman. It is appropriate to incorporate the paragraph 9' reads as follows: "9. There is a specific allegation of harassment as against the husband as well as the father-in-law by the de-facto complainant. Therefore, the first accused and the second accused will have to face trial. The petition is thus partly allowed. Going by the definition under Section 2(a) of the said Act, there can no allegation of harassment as against the woman. Therefore, the charges as against the mother-in-law (A-3) will have to be quashed." 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the decision in Basheer Ahamed and others -vs- State rep.by the Inspector of Police, W 13, All Women Police Station, Washermenpet Circle, Chennai-21, it is a fit case for quashing the charge sheet for the offences under Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act, against the petitioner who is A4. In respect of the other offences against the fourth petitioner she has to face the case. Since the case is of the year 2009, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District is directed to dispose of the same within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. In respect of the other offences against the fourth petitioner she has to face the case. Since the case is of the year 2009, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District is directed to dispose of the same within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.