The High Court rejected the petitioner's plea to quash the First Information Report (FIR) under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court held that allegations of cheating and issuance of forged visas require enquiry and found no reason to quash the FIR at this stage.
The petition is dismissed. No quashing of the FIR.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.03.2015
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN
CRL.O.P.No.2313 of 2015
Vijayakumari @ Krishnakumari .. Petitioner
Vs.
Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to call for the records relating to Crime No.4 of 2015 on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same. For Petitioner : M/s.T.Muruganantham For Respondent : Mr.M.Maharaja Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R
This Petition has been filed by the petitioner/2nd accused in Cr.No.4 of 2014 on the file of the respondent to quash the same.
2.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that reading of the complaint given by the second respondent would reveal that the offence was committed only by the first accused and the petitioner who is the wife of the first petitioner has nothing to do with the offence alleged have been committed and therefore, the case which has been registered has to be quashed. He also submitted that in respect of some incident, the defacto complaint/ second respondent initiated proceedings under Section 138 of N.I.Act in C.C.No.79 of 2009 against the first accused and in the statutory notice issued by the defacto complainant/second respondent to the petitioner's husband, he made allegations only against the first accused and no allegations were made against the second respondent and therefore, the charge is liable to be quashed.
complainant/second respondent reveals that the second respondent collected money from his relatives and handed over to the petitioner and her husband for sending abroad the relatives of the defacto complainant and they were brought to the airport and they were given visa and 11 persons were not sent and on enquiry they found the visa was forged one. The defacto complainant has given Rs.20 Lakhs to the petitioner and her husband and they cheated the defacto complainant and also threatened him with the above cash demanded and therefore, the case has been registered. Whether the petitioner received money from the defacto complainant or not have to be decided only by the enquiry and I find no reason to quash the FIR. Hence the petition is dismissed.
kkd
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar( )
Dt:1/4/2015
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Ariyalur District
+ 1 cc to Mr.T.Muruganantham, Advocate SR 16516
ts(co)
prk6/4
Crl.O.P.No.2313 of 2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Original Petition filed to quash the FIR under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. ought to be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vijayakumari @ Krishnakumari
State
V.Krishnamoorthy
R.S.Ramanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
