Dismissed

A.K.Rafi Baig v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC16 Sept 2022WP/32891/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was a Criminal Original Petition filed to quash an FIR on the ground that it was illegal. The court held that since the investigation was completed and a charge sheet filed, the petition was not maintainable and was closed with liberty to seek remedies elsewhere.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed with liberty to petitioners to work out their remedies in the manner known to law.

A.K.Rafi Baig Vs The Government of Tamilnadu — Quashing and FIR | 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

A.K.Rafi Baig v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.K.Rafi Baig v. The Government of Tamilnadu

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

M/s.Photon Infotech Private Vs Union of India

C.Kasinathan Vs the Tamilnadu Electricity

Pfizer Products India Vs Union of India

Mrs.Unnamalai Vs The District Collector

K.Sampath Vs The Chairman

Deivanayagam Vs Government of Puducherry