Quashed

B.Baskar v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Sept 2019CRL OP/21751/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the charge sheet against the 19th accused in a group clash case after the key witnesses who had implicated him in their 161 Cr.P.C. statements later turned hostile and stopped naming him, leaving no evidence to connect him to the offenses.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet in S.C.No.8 of 2007 is quashed insofar as the petitioner/19th accused is concerned.

B.Baskar Vs the Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.22253 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.09.2019

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.22253 of 2019

¶7

P.Jegan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.State represented by the Sub Inspector of Police,
Kalapet Police Station,
Pondicherry.
2.P.Santhosh Kumar .. Respondents

¶8

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for records relating to the impugned charge sheet in S.C.No.8 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Assistant sessions Judge at Puducherry and quash the same as for as the petitioner is concerned.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Ilangovan For R1 : Mr.D.Bharathachakravarthy Public Prosecutor (Pondicherry) For R2 : No appearance ORDER

¶10

The petitioner herein has been charged for offences under Section 148, 324, 326, 307 IPC r/w 149 of IPC. The incident which

¶11

1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

Crl.O.P.No.22253 of 2019

¶13

culminated into a First Information Report, is a group clash between two groups of students of the Government Law College of Pondicherry. The petitioner herein has been arrayed as 19^th Accused. As per the 161 Cr.P.C., statement of L.W.18, L.W.19 and L.W.20, the petitioner was implicated on the basis of the statement therein that he

¶14

had assaulted the victim with an iron rod. Apart from these three witnesses, there is no other overtact as against this petitioner. Subsequently, during the course of trial, L.W.18 was dispensed with and insofar as L.W.19 and L.W.20 are concerned, they have not implicated the petitioner and there is absolutely no overtact to connect the petitioner with the offences.

¶15

2.The copies of the chief examination has been proudced before this Court which was perused. When the only two witnesses had earlier implicated the petitioner in their 161 Cr.P.C., statement, had now turned hostile and have not mentioned the name of the petitioner herein, this Court is unable to appreciate as to how the trial

¶16

Court can convict this petitioner.

¶17

3.In the absence of any incriminating material or evidence as against this petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner need not undergo the ordeal of the criminal proceedings before the trial Court.

¶18

2/4

¶19

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.22253 of 2019

¶21

In view of the conclusion that the trial Court could arrive, this would be an appropriate and fit case where the extraordinary powers of this Court can be invoked for quashing the proceedings as against the petitioner.

¶22

4.In the light of the above observations, the impugned
charge sheet in S.C.No.8 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Assistant
sessions Judge at Puducherry , insofar as the petitioner/ 19th accused
is concerned, stands quashed and this Criminal Original Petition is
allowed.
12.09.2019
Internet: Yes/No
Index: Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
pnn
To
The Sub Inspector of Police,
Kalapet Police Station,
Pondicherry.

¶23

3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.22253 of 2019

¶25

pnn

¶26

M.S.RAMESH, J.

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.22253 of 2019

¶28

12.09.2019

¶29

4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

B.Baskar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Baskar 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

K.Gurusamy, M/81, A-6 Vs State by

Karthik Vs the Superintendent of Police

Mrs.Sangeetha Devi Vs Inspector of Police

S.Sooriyarajan Vs State Rep. by

Ramesh Vs State Rep. by

P.Jegan Vs State Rep.by