Dismissed

G.Surjithkrishnan v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC6 Feb 2023CRL OP/2425/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of FIR registered under IPC sections. Investigation completed; final report filed but not filed before court. Court declined to quash FIR. Petition dismissed; connected petition closed.

What did the court decide?

The request to quash the First Information Report was dismissed. The criminal original petition and connected miscellaneous petition were closed.

G.Surjithkrishnan Vs Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.2425 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 06.02.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.2425 of 2023

¶7

and Crl.M.P.No.1319 of 2023

G.Surjithkrishna

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Ooty Town Central Police Station, Nilgiris.

¶12

(Crime No.954 of 2020)

¶13

... Respondent

¶14

PRAYER : This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., pleased to call for the records relating to the First Information Report in Crime No.954 of 2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Ooty Town Central Police Station, Nilgiris and quash the same.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Kumaralingam For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Crl.O.P.No.2425 of 2023

¶20

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.954 of 2020, pending on the file of the respondent Police.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is unnecessarily roped in the case in Crime No.954 of 2020 registered for the offence under Sections 294(b), 353, 506(i) of IPC. Therefore, he filed this present petition.

¶22

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that investigation in this case was completed and the final report was also filed before the Court concerned, however it is not taken on file so far.

¶23

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶24

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police.

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.2425 of 2023

¶28

In view of completion of investigation and filing for final report before

¶29

the Court concerned, this Court is not inclined to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.954 of 2020. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶30

06.02.2023

¶31

ham Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order Neutral Citation Case: Yes/No

¶32

¶33

The Inspector of Police, Ooty Town Central Police Station, Nilgiris.

¶34

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶35

3/4

¶36

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

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.2425 of 2023

¶38

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J.

¶39

ham

¶40

Crl.O.P.No.2425 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.No.1319 of 2023

¶41

06.02.2023

¶42

4/4

¶43

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

G.Surjithkrishnan v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Surjithkrishnan v. Inspector of Police

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

Afsar Ali Vs Inspector of Police

Pachaiyappan Vs the Superintendent of Police

P.Rajkumar Vs T.Mohanraj

S.Saravanan Vs State Rep.by

S.Rajavelu Vs State Rep by

G.Kalaiyarasi Vs S Purushothaman