Dismissed

Ahista Kumar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC26 Feb 2018CRL OP(MD)/2603/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition filed to quash an FIR under Section 482 CrPC. The court held the prayer to be infructuous as the charge sheet had already been filed before the Judicial Magistrate, directing the magistrate to take the case on file immediately.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition dismissed as infructuous; judicial magistrate directed to take the case on file if charge sheet is filed.

Ahista Kumar Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 26.02.2018

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM

¶6

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.2603 of 2018 and MP(MD)No.1194 of 2018

1.Athista Kumar

2.Muthukrishnan

3.Sankaranarayanan

4.Ramamoorthy

: Petitioners/Accused 1 to 4

¶12

-Vs-

¶13

The Inspector of Police, Veeranallur Police Station, Veernallur, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.101 of 2017) ... 1^st Respondent / Complainant

¶14

Arunkumar ...2^nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant

¶15

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the F.I.R., in Crime No.101 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent herein and quash the same.

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.A.R.Kannappan

¶17

For 1^st Respondent : Mr.Prabhu Ramachandran Government Advocate (Crl.side)

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners to quash the F.I.R., in Crime No.101 of 2017, on the file of the first respondent police.

¶20

2.The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that due to previous enmity the second respondent has lodged a false complaint against the petitioners herein and based on the said complaint the F.I.R., has been registered under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324 and 506(i) of I.P.C.

¶21

3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) has submitted that already charge sheet has been filed on 23.06.2017, before the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi, but sofar, the case was not taken on file.

¶22

¶23

4.Recording the aforesaid submissions, this petition is dismissed as infructuous. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheranmahadevi is directed to verify if already charge sheet has been filed then he has to take the case on file without further delay. Consequently, connected MP(MD)No.1194 of 2018, is closed.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶26

/True Copy/

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

¶29

The Judicial Magistrate,Cheranmahadevi.

¶30

The Inspector of Police, Veeranallur Police Station, Veernallur, Tirunelveli District.

¶31

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

¶32

+1cc to M/s. A.R.Kannappan, Advocate in SR.NO.51087 das

¶33

MV:SV-MMS:SAR3:14/03/2018/2P/5C

¶34

CRL.O.P.(MD)No.2603 of 2018

¶35

26.02.2018

¶36

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

Ahista Kumar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahista Kumar 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

B. Suruliraj Vs the Deputy Superintendent

B. Suruliraj Vs the Deputy Superintendent

Parameswari Vs the Superintendent of Police

K.Shankara Narayanan Vs the Inspector of Police

Mohamed Mustafa Vs the Inspector of Police

Parimanam Vs the Sub Inspector of Police