Dismissed

Harinath v. State Rep.by

Madras HC13 Apr 2023CRL OP/208/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashes a Criminal Original Petition seeking quashing of a final report under Section 482 CrPC. The court held that adjudication of the complaint's veracity and the motive behind the false statement lies with the trial court. The petition is dismissed, accused attendance dispensed with, and trial directed to proceed expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Crl.O.P. dismissed; Crl.M.P. No.90 closed; Crl.M.P. No.92 allowed; appearance of petitioners dispensed with; trial directed to proceed expeditiously.

Harinath Vs State Rep.by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.04.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021 and

¶6

Crl.M.P. Nos.90 and 92 of 2021

¶7

Harinath 2. Suresh ... Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.State Rep The Sub Inspector of Police, S-9, Palavanthangal Police Station, Palavanthangal, Kanchipuram District. (Crime No.421 of 2018)

¶10

Dr.Jamuna Diwakar ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings in C.C.No.91 of 2020 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Alandur and quash the same.

¶12

1/5

¶13

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

¶14

Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021

¶15

For Petitioners : Mr.S.T.Raja

¶16

For Respondent-1 : Mr.A.Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondent-2 : Notice served-No Appearance

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This petition has been filed to quash the final report for the alleged offences under Sections 448 and 506(1) of I.P.C read with Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act.

¶19

2.It is alleged in the final report that the petitioners were

¶20

employed with a collection Agency, which is the sister concern of the Standard Chartered Bank; that the defacto complainant defaulted in making the repayment of loan taken by her from the Standard Chartered Bank and the petitioners went to the house of the defacto complainant and abused her filthy language besides harassing her.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

¶22

2/5

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021

¶25

impugned complaint is malafide. The defacto complainant has suppressed the fact that she was due to make payment to the Standard Chartered Bank. She had come up with this false complaint only to avoid payment of dues.

¶26

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1^st

¶27

respondent would submit that there are eye witnesses to the occurrence. The question as to whether the defacto complainant has made a false statement is a matter for adjudication by the trial Court. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the quash petition.

¶28

5.This Court finds that the points raised by the petitioners that the complaint is false and has been made by the defacto complainant only to avoid repayment of loan to Standard Chartered Bank has to be adjudicated only before the trial Court. Hence, this Court is not inclined to quash the impugned final report. However, the appearance of the petitioners before the trial Court is dispensed with unless the learned Magistrate deems their appearance necessary for the progress

¶29

3/5

¶30

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

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021

¶32

of the trial. It is open to the petitioners to raise all the points before the

¶33

trial Court.

¶34

With the above said observation, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Crl.M.P.No.90 of 2021 is closed and Crl.M.P.No. 92 of 2021 is allowed. The learned Judicial

¶35

Magistrate, Alandur may conduct the trial as expeditiously as possible.

¶36

13.04.2023

¶37

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Neutral Citation :Yes/No

¶38

srn To

¶39

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, S-9, Palavanthangal Police Station, Palavanthangal, Kanchipuram District.

¶40

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶41

4/5

¶42

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

¶43

Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021

¶44

SUNDER MOHAN. J,

¶45

srn

¶46

Crl.O.P.No.208 of 2021 and Crl.M.P. Nos.90 and 92 of 2021

¶47

13.04.2023

¶48

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Harinath v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harinath 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

J.Imanulla Vs the Inspector of Police

Ramasamy Vs State Rep by

Selvam Kumar Vs Inspector of Police

M/s.Aroma Ayurvedik Spa center Vs The Superintendent of Police

K.Mohanraj Vs State Rep by

Gurunathan Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police