Disposed

B.Fathima v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC21 Dec 2021CRL OP(MD)/287/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of the criminal original petition for quashing the FIR. Since a final report filed and C.C. pending for trial, quashing prayer held infructuous. Director to serve summons to accused for expedited trial and dispense appearance for Bailable Bond petition before trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Quash prayer dismissed. Direct trial Court to serve summons for trial. Petitioners allowed to approach trial Court under Section 205 Cr.P.C. for bail.

B.Fathima Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.287 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 21.12.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR Crl.O.P.(MD)No.287 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.122 of 2019

¶6

1.B.Fathima

¶7

2.S.Nashira Banu ... Petitioners/ Accused 3 & 4

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The State represented by The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dindigul, Dindigul District. (Crime No.15 of 2018) ... 1^st Respondent/ Complainant 2.Radhira Banu ... 2^nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant

¶10

3.Saiyed Abuthakir (R3 suo motu impleaded as per order dated 10.11.2021 in

¶11

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.287 of 2019) ...3^rd Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, to call for the records in Crime No.15 of 2018 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.V.Santhakumaresan

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.RMS.Sethuraman Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 Mr.S.Bharathy Kannan for R2 No appearance for R3

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking orders to call for the records in Crime No.15 of 2018 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

¶17

2.When the matter was taken up for hearing on 10.11.2021, this Court has suo motu impleaded the third respondent, who is the husband of the second respondent/defacto complainant.

¶18

3.Admittedly, the petitioner has not taken any steps to send notice to the third respondent. Moreover, when the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

1/2

¶20

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.287 of 2019

¶21

submit that the first respondent has already filed a final report and the case was taken on file in C.C.No.35 of 2021 on the file of the learned Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul and the same is pending for trial. Considering the above, the prayer sought for, has become infructuous.

¶22

4.However, the learned trial Magistrate is directed to take necessary steps to serve the summons to the accused and dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible.

¶23

5.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the appearance of the petitioners may be dispensed with before the trial Court. Considering the above, the petitioners are at liberty to file a petition under Section 205 Cr.P.C. and on such filing the petition, the learned trial Magistrate is directed to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶24

6.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

// True Copy //

¶26

csm

¶27

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶28

¶29

1.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

¶30

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,

¶31

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶32

+1 CC to M/s.S.BHARATHY KANNAN, Advocate ( SR-40130[F] dated 23/12/2021 )

¶33

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.287 of 2019 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.122 of 2019 21.12.2021

¶34

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

¶35

2/2

B.Fathima v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Fathima v. the Inspector of Police

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

Raja@Kathavarajan Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Revathi Vs the Superintendent of Police

Saravanan, Vs the Superintendent of Police

M. Senthil Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police

Santhakumari Vs The Inspector of Police

Ganapathy Vs The Inspector of Police