Opinion petition under Section 482 CrPC for quashing private proceeded under IPC sections involving assault and intimidation. Court held prima facie material exists, proceedings cannot be quashed, trial to proceed.
Petition for quashing of proceedings under C.C.No.1206 of 2014 dismissed; Connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.
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 : 09.02.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
CRL.OP.NO.31155 OF 2014 AND M.P.NO.1 OF 2014 1. D.Thiyagarajan 2. Prema 3. Kalaiarasan 4. R.Prabhu 5. R.Ganesan 6. M.Anil ..Petitioners/ A1, A2, A3, A6, A7 & A9 Vs. 1. M.P.Murugesan .. Respondent/Complainant 2. State rep by the Inspector of Police, R-10, MGR Nagar Police Station, Chennai – 600 083. .. Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.1206 of 2014 on the file of the learned XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015, quash the proceedings therein. For Petitioners : Mr.C.S.Dhanasekaran For Respondents : No appearance
ORDER
This petition is filed to call for the records in C.C.No.1206 of 2014 on the file of the XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and quash the same.
there. Therefore, he submitted that there is no case for prosecuting the petitioners and he prays for quashing the proceedings.
(i) First complaint lodged at R-10, M.G.R. Nagar P.S on 14.11.2012.
(ii) The C.S.R issued for the complaint dated 14.11.2012.
(iii) The second complaint lodged at R-10, M.G.R.Nagar P.S on 30.12.2012.
(iv) The C.S.R issued for the complaint dt:30.12.2012.
(v) Complaint filed before “The Commissioner of Police, Chennai.8” on 03.01.2013.
(vi) The acknowledgement receipt issued by the Commissioner of Police, dt:03.01.2013.
(vii) Unsigned “Kurippu Aanai” from O/o.Inspector of Police, R-10, M.G.R.Nagar., P.S., dt:03.01.2013 with its postal cover.
(viii) Photographs of damaged vehicles during the violence on 13.11.2012 and 14.11.2012.
(ix) Proof of Datewise complaints to “DIAL 100”.
ground for framing charges, the accused shall be discharged under Section 245 of Cr.P.C. As of now, the allegations made in the complaint have to be taken as true. The allegations made in the complaint, coupled with the sworn statement of the complainant and witness and the documents produced make out a case against the petitioners to take cognizance of the case under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 427 and 506 (ii) IPC. Therefore, the complaint cannot be quashed at this stage. The petitioners have to face the trial and if no case is made out for framing charges against the petitioners, undoubtedly, they are entitled for discharge under Section 245 of Cr.P.C.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Gv
To
1 . The XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
R-10, MGR Nagar Police Station,
Chennai – 600 083.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras – 104.
Copy To
The Section Officer, Criminal Section, High Court, Madras – 104.
+1cc to M/s.C.S.Dhanasekaran, Advocate, S.R.No.8282
CRL.OP.No.31155 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014
BS(CO) RLP(10/03/2022)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the private complaint under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 427 and 506(ii) IPC should be quashed at this stage.
Whether the allegations and documents produced by the complainant make out a prima facie case for taking cognizance.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
D.Thiyagarajan and others
M.P.Murugesan
G.Chandrashish
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
