Allowed

Manivel v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC17 Feb 2020CRL OP(MD)/2589/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 143 and 188 of I.P.C. by analogy with prior judgments, allowing the criminal original petition filed to quash the charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in S.T.C.No.50 of 2019 are quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

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

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 17.02.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2589 of 2020

¶7

1.Manivel 2.Sakthivel 3.Gowthaman 4.Murugesan 5.Ramadurai 6.Ananth 7.Sathanantham 8.Matha 9.Prema ..Petitioners Vs. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, K.Paramathi Police Station, Karur District. (Crime No.332 of 2017) ..Respondent

¶8

..Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the Charge Sheet in S.T.C.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aravakurichi, Karur District and quash the same.

¶10

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Bindran For Respondent : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This quash petition is filed to quash the criminal proceedings in S.T.C.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aravakurichi, Karur District, thereby having been taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 143 and 188 of I.P.C. as against the petitioners.

¶13

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

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

4.Heard both sides and perused the materials on record.

¶17

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 S.T.C.No.50 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aravakurichi, Karur District, is hereby quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

¶18

vsg

¶19

To:

¶20

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Aravakurichi, Karur District.

¶21