SASIKALA PUSHPA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU
LAWS(SC)-2019-5-25
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on May 07,2019

Sasikala Pushpa Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

AMARSANG NATHAJI V. HARDIK HARSHADBHAI PATEL [REFERRED TO]
CHINTAMANI MALVIYA V. HIGH COURT OF M.P. [REFERRED TO]
K T M S MOHD AMANULLAH QUARESHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PEPSI FOODS LIMITED VS. SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE [REFERRED TO]
SACHIDA NAND SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
IQBAL SINGH MARWAH VS. MEENAKSHI MARWAH [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION VS. RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAVA IAS [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

DIMPLES INFRA VS. HEER MEHTA LANDMARK DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. [LAWS(BOM)-2019-12-81] [REFERRED TO]
A. RADHIKA VS. WILSON SUNDARARAJ [LAWS(MAD)-2021-2-254] [REFERRED TO]
BIJAY KUMAR SAHOO VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2022-3-132] [REFERRED TO]
NAND KUMAR VERMA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-2-28] [REFERRED TO]
DHIRUBHAI MOHANBHAI BHANDERI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2023-2-2073] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

R.BANUMATHI, J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals [SLP(Crl) Nos. 7252, 7287 and 8206 of 2016] arise out of the judgment dated 14.09.2016 passed by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissing anticipatory bail application in Crl. OP (MD) No. 15370 of 2016 filed by the appellants. By the same judgment, the learned Single Judge of the High Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to lodge a complaint with the jurisdictional police station against the appellants with respect to the alleged forgery committed by them in signing the vakalatnama. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court, the Registrar (Judicial) lodged a complaint with K. Pudur Police Station, Madurai on 19.09.2016, on the basis of which, FIR in Crime No. 1331/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 193, 466, 468 and 471 IPC was registered against the appellants.
(3.)The first appellant was the then Member of Rajya Sabha and expelled Member of AIADMK Political Party. The third appellant is the husband of the first appellant. A complaint was filed by one Banumathi who was then working as maid in the house of the appellants in the year 2011 alleging that she was sexually harassed while she was working in the house of the appellants. Based on the said complaint, a criminal case was registered against all the appellants in Crime No. 5/2016 in All Women's Police Station under Sections 294(b), 323, 344, 354(A) and 506(i) IPC and under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002. The first appellant denied all the allegations and claimed that the same was result of political vendetta against her.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.