Allowed

K.Saran Raj v. State Rep by

Madras HC24 Feb 2022CRL OP/4194/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras allowed a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIR No.210 of 2017. The court found the facts similar to prior judgments and held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings pending against all accused, leading to the quashing of the case.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in Crime No.210 of 2017 against all accused stands quashed and connected miscellaneous petition closed.

K.Saran Raj Vs State Rep by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.02.2022

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

CRL.O.P.NO.4194 OF 2022 AND CRL.M.P.NO.2096 OF 2022

¶6

K.Saran Raj

¶7

The State Represented By, The Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District. (Crime No.210 of 2017)

¶8

PRAYER:The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure pleased to call for the records in Crime.No.210 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District for the offence under section 143 & 188 of IPC and quash the same.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajesh Vivekananthan

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan Additional Public Prosecutor

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The petition has been filed seeking to call for the records in Crime.No.210 of 2017 on the file of the first respondent Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District for the offence under section 143 & 188 of IPC and quash the same.

¶13

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the facts of the case are 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 the case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police,

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel and perused the materials on available on record.

¶18

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.

¶19

In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the FIR pending in respect of all the other accused also.

¶20

Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the proceedings in Crime No.210 of 2017 dated 18.04.2017 on the file of the first respondent Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District in respect of all the accused stands quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(CS V)

¶23

//True Copy//

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

rgi/ham

¶26

¶27