The High Court of Judicature at Madras quashed criminal proceedings instituted under a private complaint pending for over 13 years due to the complainant's non-appearance, holding that no useful purpose would be served by further delay.
The entire proceedings in CC.No.4617 of 2002 were quashed and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.
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: 21.03.2016
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA
CrlOP.No.1695 of 2016 and Crl.MP.No.819 of 2016
Jaya Murugan ... Petitioner
Vs. 1.S.Madhan 2.H.Mahendra Kumar ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the case in CC.No.4617 of 2002 pending trial on the file of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and to quash the same.
For Petitioner :Mr.K.G.Senthil Kumar For Respondents :R1 and R2 served. No appearance
This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in CC.No.4617 of 2002 on the file of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is facing the criminal trial on the basis of the private complaint given by the 1st respondent before the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, under Section 190(1) (a) CrPC, for offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 read with 34 IPC. After taking cognizance, notice has been issued and the petitioner has appeared before the trial Court. But, the complainant has not appeared before the trial Court and the matter has been periodically adjourned. From 2002 onwards, the matter is pending before the trial Court. He further submitted that there is a delay in preferring the complaint and the case is pending for more than 13 years. The petitioner has filed a discharge petition before the trial Court in M.P.No.7301 of 2002, which is pending, because of non appearance of the complainant. As per Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is entitled for speedy trial. Even though private complaint has been served with
notice, there was no representation before the trial Court. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with this petition to quash the proceedings.
3.On perusal of the typedset of papers, the 1st respondent herein has filed the private complaint for offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 read with 34 IPC against the petitioner and the 2nd respondent stating that on 04.05.2002, the alleged occurrence has been taken place but, the complaint has been given on 01.07.2002 and no document has been filed to show that he has given a complaint before the same police. The petitioner herein has given his complaint, which was taken on file in Crime No.950 of 2002 on the file of E3 Police Station. So, there is a delay in preferring the complaint. Furthermore, the petitioner has filed the discharge petition before the trial Court in M.P.NO.7301 of 2002 on 22.10.2002, which is still pending, because of non appearance of the complainant. On perusal of the adjudication order, from 24.02.2012 onwards, the complainant has not appeared before the trial Court and the matter has been adjourned periodically. As per Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/accused is entitled for speedy trial.
Considering the nature of allegation and the 1st respondent has filed a private complaint and further, without attending the Court, the matter was adjourned periodically for the past 13 years, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. Therefore, the entire proceedings in CC.No.4617 of 2002 on the file of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, is, hereby, quashed and this Criminal Original Petition is allowed accordingly. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. mps s/dAssistant Registrar(CO) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. 2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Madras. + 1 cc to M/s.K.G.Senthilkumar, Advocate SR 17795 ak(co) prk7/4 CrlOP.No.1695 of 2016 & Crl.MP.No.819 of 2016
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings pending for over 13 years due to non-appearance of the complainant could be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Whether prolonged delay in trial violates the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Jaya Murugan
S. Madhan
H. Mahendra Kumar
R. Mala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
R. Mala
Parties & counsel
