Allowed

Ragunathan v. State Rep by

Madras HC10 Aug 2023CRL OP(MD)/397/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras allowed a Criminal Original Petition filed to quash criminal proceedings in a case involving derogatory remarks against the District Collector. The Court quashed the proceedings citing that the incident was spontaneous and within the scope of Section 95 of the IPC.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of criminal proceedings in C.C.No.14 of 2021 and closure of connected miscellaneous petitions.

Ragunathan Vs State Rep by — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 10.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.306 & 307 of 2022

¶7

1.Ragunathan

¶8

2.Kandasamu

¶9

3.Ganesan

¶10

4.Subramanian

¶11

5.Senthil @ Colony Senthil

¶12

6.Prabhu

¶13

7.Ilavarasu

¶14

8.Senthilkumar

¶15

9.R.S.Raja

¶16

10.Gopinath

¶17

11.Karthick

¶18

12.C.K.Raja

¶19

13.Arvinsh

¶20

14.Thambi

¶21

15.Asinkarthick @ Karthikeyan

¶22

16.Ashokumar

¶23

17.V.P.Sekar

¶24

18.Saravanamoorthi

¶25

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

¶26

Page No.1/5

¶27

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022

19.S.Saravanan

20.M.Vikram

...Petitioners

vs.

1.The State rep by Inspector of Police, CBCID South, Karur District Crime No.2 of 2020

¶33

2.T.Anbalagan

¶34

...Respondents

¶35

PRAYER:

¶36

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for records relating to C.C.No.14 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur and quash the same as illegal.

¶37

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Sivabalan For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor, for R1

¶38

ORDER

¶39

This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the proceedings

¶40

pending in CC.No.14 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur.

¶41

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

¶42

Page No.2/5

¶43

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022

¶44

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

¶45

The case of the prosecution is that A1 came to the office of the District

¶46

Collector along with a group of persons to give representation. A1 was questioned as to why there is congregation without following the COVID protocol. That apart, it was also seen that some of the persons, who accompanied A1, did not wear mask. There was a wordy quarrel and at that point of time, A1 was said to have made derogatory remarks against the District Collector. Based on his complaint, a FIR came to be registered in Crime No.2 of 2020. The investigation was completed and a final report was filed before the Court below and it was taken on file in C.C.No.14 of 2021 for offence under Section 143 read with 109, 153, 353 and 506(2) of IPC and Section 52(a) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

¶47

The entire incident seem to have happened in a spur of the moment and that too, during the pandemic period. The facts of the present case can be brought within the scope of Section 95 of IPC and no useful purpose will be served by making the accused persons undergo the trial.

¶48

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

¶49

Page No.3/5

¶50

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022

¶51

In view of the above, this criminal original petition is allowed and accordingly, the proceedings in C.C.No. 14 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Karur, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

¶52

10.08.2023

¶53

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order nsa

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4/5

¶55

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022

¶56

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶57

nsa

¶58

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.397 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.306 & 307 of 2022

¶59

10.08.2023

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.5/5

Ragunathan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ragunathan 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

K.Saradha Vs The District Superintendent of Police

V.Ammu Vs The Inspector of Police (L and O)

S.N.Palani, Vs The District Superiintendent of Police

K.a.Manoharan Vs State Represented by Its

K.a.Manoharan Vs the State Rep by Its

S.Gandhiselvan Vs State by