Allowed

T.C.Bharathkumar v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC6 Oct 2023CRL OP/8792/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a Criminal Original Petition seeking quashing of a final report filed against the petitioner under Section 75(i)(c) of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act. The Court held that the section applies to conduct in a public place, whereas the alleged incident occurred inside a private house.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition allowed; Final report in S.T.C.No.754 of 2021 quashed insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

T.C.Bharathkumar Vs the State Rep.by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P..No.8792 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 06.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.8792 of 2022

¶7

T.Bharathkumar ... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

1.The State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Race Course Police Station, Coimbatore.

¶9

2.B.Sanjai Krishna ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records and quash the final report in S.T.C.No.754 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Coimbatore as illegal in so far as the petitioner is concerned.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.B.Viswanathan For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The petitioner is arrayed as 4 th accused by the respondent police in

¶14

the final report pursuant to the complaint registered in FIR No.21 of 2021

¶15

dated 07.01.2021.

¶16

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

¶17

1/4

¶18

Crl.O.P..No.8792 of 2022

¶19

2. The sum and substance of the First Information Report is that on a rainy day, there was flow of rain water from the building occupied by the accused persons to the house of the defacto complainant and that was objected, wordy quarrel erupted. The accused persons barged into the house of the defacto complainant with criminal intention of trespass. When that was resisted, the accused by name Sethupathi and Ramkumar hit them over the body with hands and abused him. On completion of investigation, final report has been filed. As far as A1 to A3 are concerned, charge under Sections 75(i)(c) of TNCP Act, 448 & 352 of IPC and as against this petitioner, charge under Section 75(i)(c) of TNCP Act, been framed. Out of four accused, three pleaded guilty in S.T.C.No.754 of 2021. Hence the case against this petitioner got split up and renumbered as S.T.C.No.492 of 2023. Final report as against this petitioner is for uttering obscene words, which according to the prosecution attracts Section 75 (i)(c) of Chennai City Police Act.

¶20

3. Reading of Section 75 (i)(c) of CCP Act, indicate that whoever, in any public place, office, station-house or Court, or in any place of public amusement or on board of any passenger boat or vessel is found behaving in

¶21

2/4

¶22

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

¶23

Crl.O.P..No.8792 of 2022

¶24

a violent or boisterous or disorderly or riotous or indecent manner or using any threatening, abusive or insulting words which causes or is likely to cause a breach of public peace is liable to be prosecuted.

¶25

4. In this case obviously and admittedly the incident has took place inside the house and not in a public place. There is no material to show the conduct of the petitioner, who had caused the breach of public peace and was within the sight and vicinity of public. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition to quash the case is liable to be allowed.

¶26

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

¶27

06.10.2023

¶28

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶29

rpl To

¶30

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Coimbatore

¶31

2.The Inspector of Police, Race Course Police Station, Coimbatore.

¶32

3/4

¶33

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

¶34

Crl.O.P..No.8792 of 2022

¶35

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

¶36

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

¶37

rpl

¶38

Crl.O.P.No.8792 of 2022

¶39

06.10.2023

¶40

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

¶41

4/4

T.C.Bharathkumar v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.C.Bharathkumar v. the 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

M.S.Mohammed Mustafa Vs State Rep by

Mohamed Uzama Vs the Commissioner of Police

Shantilal Betala Vs M/S.Paceman Finance India (P) Limited

Suresh Kumar Vs State Rep.by Its

Mopuri Sreenivas Kiran Vs Pedireddy Rajasekhar Ravou

A.Marimuthu Vs G.Ashok Kumar