Dismissed

Kasthuri v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Nov 2023CRL OP/5432/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Original Petition seeking quashment of a criminal case against the petitioners was dismissed. The Court held that the trial Judge's reasons for acquitting the first accused did not squarely apply to the petitioners, who are charged with separate offences including dowry harassment, and thus the case must proceed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition is dismissed; the Trial Court is directed to complete the trial within four months.

Kasthuri Vs the Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.5432 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 22.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.5432 of 2022 and

¶7

Crl.M.P.No.2965 of 2022

¶8

1. Kasthuri

¶9

2. Nivas @ Nivas Kumar ... Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1. The Inspector of Police, AWPS- Ulundurpet Police Station, Kallakurichi District. Crime No.02 of 2017.

¶12

2. Victoria ...Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records relating to the private complaint in C.C.No.75 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ulundurpet.

¶14

For Petitioner : M/s. M.Dinesh for Mr.S.Subburaj For R1 : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶15

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

¶16

1/4

¶17

Crl.O.P.No.5432 of 2022

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Petition to quash the criminal case pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Ulundurpet in C.C.No.75 of 2017. Petitioners are A2 and A3, who are aunt and son of the first accused. Since the case against these two accused was stayed in the quash petition pending before the Court, which is under consideration now, the case against first accused ie., husband of the defacto complainant was split up and assigned C.C.No.110 of 2018 and the trial proceeded.

¶20

2. In the said split up case, the trial Court after examining the defacto complainant as PW1 ( Victoria) and other prosecution witnesses, had acquitted A1.

¶21

3. Hence, in this petition, contending that, petitioners are distant relative of the first accused. While, First accused had already been acquitted by the trial Court, case against the petitioners also to be quashed.

¶22

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, subsequent to the filing of the case, trial against A1 ended in acquittal. Hence, nothing

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.O.P.No.5432 of 2022

¶26

survives against the petitioners.

¶27

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State/ respondent submitted that, apart from dowry harassment, there are two other charges against the petitioners therefore they are liable to face the prosecution. . In the absence of A1, these offences were committed by these two petitioners. The acquittal of A1 and the reason given by the trial Court for the acquittal will not apply to this petitioner.

¶28

6. This Court on perusing the acquittal judgement of A1 and the reason given by the trial Judge for acquitting A1 find it may not squarely be applicable to these petitioners. Therefore, petition to quash on the ground that they are distant relatives and therefore no offence made out against them does not carry merits. Petitioners are liable to face the trial for the charges framed.

¶29

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. The learned Trial Judge is directed to take up the C.C.No.75 of 2017 on priority basis and complete the trial within a period of four months. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶30

22.11.2023

¶31

3/4

¶32

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

¶33

Crl.O.P.No.5432 of 2022

¶34

Sma

¶35

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶36

Sma

¶37

To:

¶38

1. The Inspector of Police, AWPS- Ulundurpet Police Station, Kallakurichi District.

¶39

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

¶40

Crl.O.P.No.5432 of 2022

¶41

22.11.2023

¶42

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

¶43

4/4

Kasthuri v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasthuri v. the 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

K.Moorthy @ Jaya [email protected] Senje Raja Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

P.Mylsamy Vs Gomathi

Manimegelai Vs the Superintendent of Police (Rural)

State Bank of India Vs the State Rep by Its, Inspector of Police

S.Allauudin Vs the State Rep by

Azizul Karim Vs the Commissioner of Police