Allowed

Mohamed Madarsha v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC7 Feb 2020CRL OP(MD)/2112/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court quashed proceedings in C.C.No. 516 of 2016 and allowed Criminal Original Petition No. 2112 of 2020. The court found facts similar to Jeevanandham (2018) and Sri Raja (2019), leading to the closure of connected miscellaneous petitions.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C.No. 516 of 2016 quashed insofar as petitioners concerned; Criminal Original Petition allowed; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Mohamed Madarsha Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 2112 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.02.2020 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶4

Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 2112 of 2020 and Crl.M.P(MD)Nos. 1076 and 1077 of 2020

¶5

Mohamed Madarsha 2. Riya Ahamed 3. Mariya Arputham

¶6

Fouzur Rahaman

¶7

Ramadass

¶8

Maideen Batcha

¶9

Mohamed Abdullah

¶10

Sheik Fasith

¶11

Kaja Sherif 10. Rahmathullah 11. Riyas Deen

¶12

Pandiayan

¶13

Arumugam 14. Batcha Miyaan 15. Mohamed Nazir 16. Abdul Lathif 17. Rasith Ahamed ... Petitioners/A1 to 11 & 13 to 17 Vs. 1. The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, City North Police Station Dindigul. (Crime No. 195 of 2016) ... R-1/Complainant 2. Theivam, The Inspector of Police, City North Police Station, Dindigul. ... R-2/Defacto Complainant

¶14

PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the case in C.C.No.516 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul in Crime No.195 of 2016 on the file of the Respondent police and quash the same as illegal in so far as the petitioners.

¶15

For Petitioners: Mr.B. Arun For R-1 : Mr.S. Chandrasekar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

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

¶17

1/3

¶18

Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 2112 of 2020

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the case in C.C.No.516 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul in Crime No.195 of 2016 on the file of the Respondent police.

¶21

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the facts of the case are exactly similar to the case covered in the decision reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018 and in case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and other in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD) No.7922 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019.

¶22

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the facts of the case are similar to the facts covered under the Judgment referred above.

¶23

4.Heard both sides and perused the materials on record

¶24

5.The facts of this case is similar to the facts covered by the Judgment of this Court reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018 and in case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and other in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD) No.7922 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019. Considering the facts and submissions, the proceedings in C.C.No. 516 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul, is hereby quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

// True Copy //

ksa