Disposed

L.Saravanan v. State Rep. by

Madras HC24 Jan 2019CRL OP/746/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash an FIR alleging innocent implication. The Court declined to quash the FIR, directing the police to complete the investigation and add any missing accused before submitting a final report within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to complete investigation and file final report within three months; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

L.Saravanan Vs State Rep. by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.01.2019

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶4

Crl.O.P.No.746 of 2019

¶5

and Crl.MP.No.485 of 2019

L.Saravanan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.State Rep. by: The Inspector of Police R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station, Raghavan Colony,

¶10

Chennai-600 083

¶11

2.Mrs.S.Valli ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of the FIR in Crime No.1099 of 2018 on the file of the Inspector of Police, R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station, Raghavan Colony, Chennai -600 083 and to quash the same in view of the proceedings on the petitioner as accused 1.

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No1099 of 2018, pending on the file of the respondent police.

¶15

2.The petitioner has been shown as A1 in the FIR. Sufficient allegations have been made in the FIR against the accused persons. The learned counsel for the petitioner wanted to place reliance upon certain materials in order to establish that it was one Ramachandran, who had taken away the entire money and he has been left out and the petitioner who was nothing to do an offence, has been made as an accused.

¶16

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is going on and if the respondent police finds, that Ramachandran is also involved in the Crime, he will also be added as an accused. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that the materials placed by the petitioner can also be given to the Investigating Officer and the same will be taken into consideration at the time of investigation.

¶17

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

¶18

4.This Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent police to complete the investigation and file a final report within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rpl/mpa
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station,
Raghavan Colony,
Chennai -600 083
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.R.Balaguruswamy, Advocate, S.R.No.5393 (01/03/2019)
Crl.O.P.No.746 of 2019
and
Crl.MP.No.485 of 2019
rrs 11/02/2019

¶20

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

L.Saravanan v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Saravanan v. State Rep. by

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

Yesu Vs the State Rep by Its

C.Balu Vs R.M.Meiyappan

Derick Cutinha Vs the State Rep.by

M/S.Pavilion Commercial Private Limited Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

V.Balakrishnan Vs the State Rep by

K.Dhanaraj Vs the Inspector of Police