Petition challenging proceedings under Section 145 CrPC for property dispute. Court avoided merits but directed Magistrate to proceed strictly under Section 145 within six weeks.
Proceedings under Section 145 CrPC to continue within six weeks; petition dismissed.
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 : 04.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
CRL.O.P.No.23547 of 2019 and Crl.MP.No.12388 of 2019
D.Ezhilarasi @ Meera ...Petitioner
.Vs.
1.Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Karaikal,
Puducherry.
2.State rep.by
Inspector of Police,
T.R.Pattinam Police Station,
Karaikal,
Puducherry.
3.Selvaraj ...Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in
M.C.No.273 of 2019, on the file of the learned Sub Divisional
Magistrate, Karaikal, Puducherry and quash the same as against
the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Vivekananthan For Respondents : Mr.V.Balamurugane
Additional Public Prosecutor Puducherry for R 1 & R 2 Mr.R.S.Raghavan for R3
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the 1st respondent in M.C.No.273 of 2019, wherein the 1st respondent has called the petitioner and the 3rd respondent to attend for an enquiry along with all the relevant documents.
2.Heard Mr.R.Vivekananthan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.V.Balamurugane, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.R.S.Raghavan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent.
3.It is seen from records that there is a property dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. Admittedly, there are no pending civil proceedings as on the date when the 1st respondent had issued the proceedings directing the parties to appear for an enquiry. The proceedings of the 1st respondent clearly explains the reasons as to why the 1st respondent came to a conclusion that there is a likelihood of breach of peace which has to be immediately brought under control. The 1st respondent has not passed any orders and he has merely called the parties for an enquiry.
4.In view of the above, this Court does not want to go into the merits of the case and it is left open to the parties to appear before the 1st respondent and give their statements along with the necessary documents. The 1st respondent is directed to proceed further strictly in accordance with the provisions under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and complete the proceedings within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order .
5.This Criminal Original petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
KP To
1.Sub Divisional Magistrate, Karaikal,Puducherry.
+1cc to Mr.R.S.Ragavan , Advocate SR.No. 13877
+1cc to Mr.R.Vivekananthan, Advocate SR.No. 14280
CRL.O.P.No.23547 of 2019
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ A.SK(24.03.2021)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 145 of CrPC should be allowed to proceed or quashed given the absence of pending civil proceedings.
Whether the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate was justified in calling parties for an enquiry to prevent breach of peace.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
D. Ezhilarasi @ Meera
Sub Divisional Magistrate, Karaikal
State represented by Inspector of Police, T.R.Pattinam Police Station
Selvaraj
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
