MARY ANGEL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The question involved in this appeal is whether the High Court has jurisdiction to impose "exemplary cost of Rs. 10,000/-" to be paid by each of the appellant while rejecting a frivolous or vexatious petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for setting aside the charge framed against the appellants

(3.) FIR was lodged by Josephine Jaya on 29th September, 1989 stating that her in-laws demanded from her father Rs. 60,000.00 in cash, 65 sovereigns of gold jewellery for the bride and nine sovereigns or similar jewellery for the groom; that out of Rs. 60,000.00, Rs. 50,000.00 were paid, that after the marriage, she was treated cruelly and there were unlawful demands for a colour television and Rs. 50,000.00 in cash. It is also alleged that at the instigation of in-laws accused Nos. 2 to 6, accused No. 1 (her husband) administered certain medicine with a view to abort her pregnancy. After preliminary investigation on 18th October, 1989, a charge-sheet was filed against A-1 to A-6 under Sections 498(A), 406, 420, 315 I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The case was committed to the Sessions Court, Nagercoil and was numbered as Sessions Case No. 10 of 1989. Accused Nos. 3 to 6 filed an application under Section 227 of the Criminal Procedure Code for their discharge. That application was allowed by holding that they had not demanded dowry and there is no material to show that medicine for abortion was administered at their instigation. Against that order, complainant filed Criminal R. C. No. 442 of 1990 before the High Court of Madras. By Order dated 9th July, 1993, the High Court allowed the Revision case filed by the complainant and set aside the order of discharge. In pursuance of the said Order, on 13th June, 1996, learned Sessions Judge framed charges against accused Nos. A-3 to A-6 also.