Dismissed

Biju v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC15 Mar 2018CRL OP(MD)/20271/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge Bench of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing an FIR, holding it infructuous because the investigation was completed and a charge sheet was filed before the Court concerned.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition and connected miscellaneous petition were dismissed as infructuous.

Biju Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 15.03.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20271 of 2013

¶7

and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2013

¶8

1.Biju

¶9

2.Abdul Rahman

¶10

3.Mohamed Shoaib ... Petitioners /Accused Nos.1 to 3 Vs.

¶11

1.The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District. ... 1^st Respondent /Complainant

¶12

2.Kingsley ... 2^nd Respondents/Defacto Complainant

¶13

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records in Crime No.260 of 2013 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District and quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.C.Muthu Saravanan

¶15

For RR1 : Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶16

For RR2 : Mr.D.Saravanan

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos.1 to 3, in Crime No.260 of 2013, on the file of the 1^st respondent police. This petition has been filed under the provisions of Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the above said FIR.

¶19

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) on instructions would submit that after completing investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Court concerned and the same has been taken on file as C.C.No.452 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.

¶20

¶21

The submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) is recorded. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed.

¶22

Sd/Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶23

/True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

Judicial Magistrate No.II, Valliyoor, Tirunelveli District.

¶27

2.The Inspector of Police,

¶28

Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶29

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶30

+1CC TO M/S.D.SARAVANAN, ADVOCATE, SR NO.56074

¶31

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20271 of 2013 15.03.2018

¶32

PJL

¶33

MS/JC/SAR-1/04.04.2018/2P.5C

¶34

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Biju v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police

I. Lakshmanan Vs the Inspector of Police

Sridhar Pappy, Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramamoorthypandian Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

R.P.Ramkumar, Vs the Inspector of Police

Raja @ Rajan Vs the Inspector of Police