The High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking quashing of proceedings for forgery and cheating. Relying on a Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that merits must be decided during trial, not at the quashing stage, due to prima facie evidence.
Criminal Original Petition dismissed; trial directed to proceed uninfluenced by observations in this order.
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 : 25.03.2019
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.No.944 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.Nos.626 & 627 of 2019
T.Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs. 1.State by:- The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Salem, Cr.No.2/96 2.The Under Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai ... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records relating to the final report in C.C.No.108 of 2015 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Salem, quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Naganathan For Respondents For R1 : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.Dr.M.Devendran, Standing Counsel (TNPSC)
O R D E R This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.108 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-IV, Salem, having been taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 466, 468, 471 and 420 r/w 34 I.P.C, as against the petitioner.
Community. The charge as against the petitioner is that the petitioner produced community certificate as if he belongs to Kondareddys community and classified as scheduled tribe community so as to enable him to get a seat in medical college for studying MBBS. Further the charge is that A1, pursuant to their inducement, deceased accused Nachimuthu with the assistance of A1, Chandrasekaran, the then Revenue Inspector of Mettur Revenue Divisional Office created forged community certificates as if A2 to A5 belonged to 'Konda Reddi' community affixing the fascimile seal of the then Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiru.Kaliaperumal, purporting the same to be made by a public servant, namely the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur and thereby they committed offence for the offence punishable under Sections 466, 468, 471 and 420 r/w 34 I.P.C.
2.1.He further submitted that there is absolutely no material either documentary or oral in final report to speak about the fact that the petitioner had participated in any activity of fabricating or forging the community certificate. Further he submitted that even the case of the prosecution is that the first accused Revenue Inspector has put his initial in the alleged fabricated document. Therefore there is absolutely no evidence to show that the petitioner only applied for the community certificate and he fabricated the said document. Further he submitted that even in his father's statement it was stated that he only applied in the year 1988 for the community certificate of the petitioner as such he is nothing to do with the crime as alleged by the prosecution. Further he submitted that except the counter filed by the respondent there is no other document or evidence to attract charge as against the petitioners.
5.There are totally five accused in which the petitioner is the second accused. The petitioner has been charged for the offence under Sections 466, 468, 471 and 420 r/w 34 I.P.C. by the first respondent. It is seen that the charge as against the petitioner is that the petitioner produced community certificate as if he belongs to Kondareddys community and classified as scheduled tribe community so as to enable him to get a seat in medical college for studying MBBS. Further the charge is that A1, pursuant to their inducement, deceased accused Nachimuthu with the assistance of A1, Chandrasekaran, the then Revenue Inspector of Mettur Revenue Divisional Office created forged community certificates as if A2 to A5 belonged to 'Konda Reddi' community affixing the fascimile seal of the then Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiru.Kaliaperumal, purporting the same to be made by a public servant, namely the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mettur and thereby they committed offence for the offence punishable under Sections 466, 468, 471 and 420 r/w 34 I.P.C.
"4. The only point that arises for our consideration in this case is whether the High Court was right in setting aside the order by which process was issued. It is
settled law that the Magistrate, at the stage of taking cognizance and summoning, is required to apply his judicial mind only with a view to taking cognizance of the offence, or in other words, to find out whether a prima facie case has been made out for summoning the accused persons. The learned Magistrate is not required to evaluate the merits of the material or evidence in support of the complaint, because the Magistrate must not undertake the exercise to find out whether the materials would lead to a conviction or not.
...................... 9. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel and examined the material on record, we are of the considered view that the High Court ought not to have set aside the order passed by the Trial Court issuing summons to the Respondents. A perusal of the complaint discloses that prima facie, offences that are alleged against the Respondents. The correctness or otherwise of the said allegations has to be decided only in the Trial. At the initial stage of issuance of process it is not open to the Courts to stifle the proceedings by entering into the merits of the contentions made on behalf of the accused. Criminal complaints cannot be quashed only on the ground that the
allegations made therein appear to be of a civil nature. If the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused are prima facie made out in the complaint, the criminal proceeding shall not be interdicted."
10.In view of the above discussions, this petition is devoid
of merits and this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. It
is made clear that the trial court is directed to conduct the
trial in C.C.No.108 of 2015 and dispose of the same uninfluenced
by any of the observations made in this order. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
lok
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
CBCID, Salem,
Cr.No.2/96
2.The Under Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Chennai
3. The Judicial Magistrate No.IV,
Salem
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.N.Naganathan, Advocate, SR.No.28231
+1cc to Dr.M.Devendran, Advocate, SR.No.28229
Crl.O.P.No.944 of 2019
Kak(20/06/2019)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the quash petition has merit despite the Supreme Court's ruling on non-merit consideration at stage of quashing.
Whether the petitioner participated in fabricating community certificates based on available statements.
Whether the High Court should quash criminal proceedings under Sections 466, 468, 471 and 420 IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. the State of Maharashtra & ors.Referred¶19
Crl.A.No.255 of 2019 dated 12.02.2019 - Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. the State of Maharashtra & ors.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
T.Rajendran
State by:- The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Salem
The Under Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Parties & counsel
