Dismissed

Sathish Kumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC13 Oct 2023CRL OP/12256/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the FIR. The judgment held that sufficient material collected by the prosecution and the co-accused confession were adequate to proceed against the petitioner, with guilt subject to witness testimony.

What did the court decide?

The petition for quash was dismissed and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Sathish Kumar Vs State Rep by — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023 and Crl.MP.No.7471 of 2023

¶7

1.Sathish Kumar 2.Saranraj

¶8

... Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Minjur Police Station, Thiruvallur District (Crime No. 415/2022)

¶11

2.VVSN Rao ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to call for records relating to CC No.280 of 2022 on the file of Inspector of Police, C C No. 280 of 2022, Minjur Police Station, Thiruvallur District and to quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Chandrasekar For Respondents : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 R2 service awaited

¶14

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

¶15

1/5

¶16

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Th is Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the CC No.280 of

¶19

2022 pending on the file of Inspector of Police, Minjur Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

¶20

2. This is a case where metal scrap in the NTECL Company under CISF Security was stolen by using Lorry bearing Regn.No.TN-15-A58589. Based on the confession given by the driver namely Sathish Kumar, the connivance of other three accused who were employees under NTECL who facilitated to steal the scrap and remove it from the premises of NTECL had come to light and final report was filed against

¶21

three of the Office Staff of the Company and the driver.

¶22

3. The learned counsel appearing for the one of the accused Sathish Kumar, Staff of the Company of NTECL Company is before this Court to quash the case on the ground that there is no overt act attributed against him and he is working as a Supervisor under UPL Contract in NTECL Company. Except the confession statement of the co-accused, there is no incriminating materials against him.

¶23

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

¶24

2/5

¶25

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023

¶26

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the

¶27

scrap stolen from the premises was traced by CISF Personnel and

¶28

recovered. The driver had implicated other three persons engaged by NTECL Company. The materials collected during the course of investigation is enough to proceed against these accused for the offence under Sections 380 and 34 of IPC.

¶29

5. This Court, on going through the records is in agreement with

¶30

the contention made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that for framing charges and proceeding against this petition, there is enough material collected by the prosecution.

¶31

6. The guilt of the petitioner will be proved if the witnesses stand

¶32

by their version. Hence, the petition for quash is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶33

¶34

13.10.2023

¶35

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

¶36

3/5

¶37

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023

¶38

¶39

The Inspector of Police, Minjur Police Station, Thiruvallur District

¶40

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

¶41

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

¶42

4/5

¶43

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023

¶44

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

¶45

¶46

Crl.OP.No.12256 of 2023

¶47

13.10.2023

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

Sathish Kumar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathish Kumar v. State Rep by

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

S.Rajasekar Vs the State Rep by Its

N.Syamasundara Naidu Vs v.Dakshinamoorthy

V.Prabakaran Vs Sub Inspector of Police

V.P.Vaijaindhimala Vs Superintendent of Police

Amjath Ali Vs Inspector of Police

Dinesh Vs the Inspector of Police