Dismissed

S.Vallinayagam v. Union of India

Madras HC19 Jul 2022WP/30829/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a petition seeking quashing of an FIR where the state submitted that the investigation was completed and a charge sheet had been filed. The court held that no adjudication remained in the petition and closed it with liberty to pursue other remedies.

What did the court decide?

Petition for quashing closed with liberty to work out remedies known to law; connected miscellaneous petition stood closed.

S.Vallinayagam Vs Union of India — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P. (MD) No.20641 of 2014

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

RESERVED ON 14.09.2022 DELIVERED ON 28.09.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N. PRAKASH

¶6

Crl.O.P. (MD) No.20641 of 2014 & M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2014

¶7

1 S.K. Rengasamy 2 R. Mathivanan 3 R. Vijayakumar 4 Kavithakala

¶8

5 Vidhyapriya

¶9

6 R. Jeyabharathi 7 Thirupathi Chettiar 8 T. Veera Raj 9 T. Ramamoorthy 10 K. Annamalai Chettiar

¶10

11 S. Sivanantham 12 R. Rathinam Petitioners vs.

¶11

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

Crl.O.P. (MD) No.20641 of 2014

¶14

1 State represented by its Inspector of Police City Crime Branch Trichy City Trichy (Cr. No.28 of 2014)

¶15

2 M. Ganesan Respondents

¶16

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to call

¶17

for the records in Cr.No.28 of 2014 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

¶18

For petitioners Mr. S. Sakthivel for Mr. S.P. Venkatasubramanian For R2 Mr. R. Muniyapparaj Addl. Public Prosecutor - - - - -

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Originally, this petition was filed in the Madurai Bench as the occurrence

¶21

took place in Trichy. However, at the request of the learned counsel on either side, the matter was transferred to the file of the Principal Seat and was directed to be

¶22

clubbed along with Crl.O.P. (MD) No.3487 of 2015 to be heard together.

¶23

2 Heard both sides.

¶24

2/4

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

Crl.O.P. (MD) No.20641 of 2014

¶27

3 This petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR in Cr.No.28 of 2014 on the file of the first respondent police.

¶28

4 When the mater was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation in Cr.No.28 of 2014 was completed and charge sheet was filed in C.C. No.164 of 2018 in the Court of the Judicial Magsitrate No.II, Trichy and thereafter, the same has been transferred to the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Trichy and renumbered as C.C. No.188 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 506(II) and 406 IPC @ Sections 120-B, 420 read with 109 IPC against 9 accused, viz., Rengasamy, Mathivanan, Vijayakumar, Kavithakala, Vidhyapriya, Jeyabharathi, Thirupathi Chettiar, Veera Raj and Ramamoorthy.

¶29

5 Since investigation has been completed and charge sheet filed, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition for quashing the FIR.

¶30

Hence, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioners to work out their remedies in the manner known to law. Connected M.P. stands closed.

¶31

cad

¶32

3/4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Crl.O.P. (MD) No.20641 of 2014

P.N. PRAKASH, J.

cad

1 The Inspector of Police City Crime Branch Trichy City Trichy

¶39

2 The Public Prosecutor Madras High Court Chennai 600 104

¶40

3 The Judicial Magistrate No.I Trichy (C.C. No.188 of 2022)

¶41

Crl.O.P. (MD) No.20641 of 2014

¶42

28.09.2022

¶43

4/4

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S.Vallinayagam v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Vallinayagam v. Union of India

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

C.Wilbert, Vs The Management of Indian

M.Narayana Vs The State of Tamilnadu rep.

S.Ansar Basha Vs The Secretary & Correspondent

M.Ganeshan Vs The State of Tamilnadu

G.Jayalakshmi Vs The Principal Secretary/

Dr.K.Prasanna, Vs The State of Tamilnadu