JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in CC.No.105/2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar and quash the proceedings in CC.No.105/2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate.) 1. The petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the further proceedings in CC.No.105/2015 which is now pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar. 2. All the accused are petitioners herein. They are facing charges under Sections 498-A read with 109 of IPC and 406, 417, 506[ii] read with 109 of IPC, on a complaint given by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant herein. 3. The marriage between the 1st petitioner/A1 and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant took place on 06.06.2011 at Cheyyar. It is the claim of the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant that sufficient jewels, household utensils and other items had been given as Sridhana. Thereafter, within a month, the 1st petitioner/A1 and the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant moved over to Ramapuram near Chennai, to continue their marital life. The allegations of illegal intimacy by the 1st petitioner/A1 with another lady, was raised by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant. Calls for assistance went unheeded. She had to call her father thereafter, who took her back to Bangalore. She had given a complaint before the 1st respondent police/All Women Police Station, Cheyyar, in which, originally, a CSR.No.19/2015 had been registered. This was on 27.01.2015. An advocate notice had also been issued. The 1st petitioner/A1 did not respond to any of the calls for grievance by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant. She also filed HMOP No.6/2015 in the Sub Court, Poonamallee, seeking divorce. For good measure, the 1st petitioner/A1 had filed HMOP.No.62/2015 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The petition seeking divorce was dismissed for default on 07.07.2015. The petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights, was allowed ex-parte on 27.02.2015. The 1st petitioner/A1 did not take any further steps after obtaining such a decree. This itself exposes his conduct. 4. A reading of the statement of the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., during the course of investigation reveals that the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant has raised allegations of causing mental and physical torture by the 1st petitioner/A1 and also that he took away all her salary month after month. This itself exposes his conduct. 4. A reading of the statement of the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., during the course of investigation reveals that the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant has raised allegations of causing mental and physical torture by the 1st petitioner/A1 and also that he took away all her salary month after month. It is also informed that during the talks held by the police officials, the 1st petitioner/A1 promised to pay a sum of Rs.2.50 Lakhs to the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant. But, he has not paid the amount till date. These are all the allegations placed in the complaint pursuant to which, the 1st respondent had registered the FIR in Crime No.3/2015 as against the petitioners herein, as stated above, under Sections 498-A, 406, 417 and 506[ii] of IPC. 5. The 2nd petitioner/A2 is the mother of 1st petitioner/A1. The 3rd petitioner/A3 is the brother of the 1st petitioner/A1. 4th petitioner/A4 is the wife of the 3rd petitioner/A3. 5th petitioner/A5, who is now dead, is the uncle of the 1st petitioner/A1 and the charges against him naturally abate. 6. A further reading of the 161 Statement recorded during investigation reveals that cognizable offences have not been made out as against A2 to A4/petitioners 2 to 4 herein. The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant has focused in her complaint, particularly with respect to the offence under Section 498-A of IPC and more particularly, under sections 406 and 417 of IPC only against the 1st petitioner/A1, who naturally have to answer charges in those regards. Very specifically it has been stated that the 1st petitioner/A1 caused mental agony by having illegal intimacy with another lady who has also been named in the complaint. It has also been very specifically stated that month after month, he took away the salary earned by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant. These allegations would naturally attract the ingredients of the offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 417 of IPC. 7. It is also complained that he had promised to pay a sum of Rs.2.50 Lakhs to the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant ; but had gone back on such promise. 8. Taking all these facts into consideration, particularly observing that no cognizable offences have been alleged or raised as against the A2 to A4/petitioners 2 to 4 herein, the criminal original petition is allowed in part with respect to the said petitioners. 8. Taking all these facts into consideration, particularly observing that no cognizable offences have been alleged or raised as against the A2 to A4/petitioners 2 to 4 herein, the criminal original petition is allowed in part with respect to the said petitioners. However, dismissed with respect to the 1st petitioner/A1, who should necessarily have to face trial with respect to the allegations levelled against him in the complaint and with respect to the charges framed on the basis of the Final Report filed by the 1st respondent police after due investigation of the averments in the FIR in Crime No.3/2015. The charges against the 5th petitioner/A5, as stated above, stand abated in view of his death. 9. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands partly allowed. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.