Petition under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of a charge sheet alleging the petitioner threatened his wife, a witness, not to depose against him during his POCSO trial. The court found prima facie material against him and dismissed the petition, permitting all factual and legal pleas before the trial court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.OP.No. 10071 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.06.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.O.P.No.10071 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.5946 of 2022
Abdul Malik ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State represented by its Inspector of Police, W-25, All Women Police Station T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.
2. A.Ramlath ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.732 of 2022, on the file of learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai and quash the same as against the petitioner.
| For Petitioner | : M/s.Binita S Vaiz |
|---|---|
| for Mr.R.Krishna Kumar | |
| For R1 | : Mr. S.Udaya Kumar, |
| Government Advocate (Crl. Side) | |
| For R2 | : No appearance |
1/4
Crl.OP.No. 10071 of 2022
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the charge sheet
taken on file in C.C.No.732 of 2022, on the file of the learned XVII
Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Saidapet, Chennai.
2. The final report indicates that the petitioner herein was initially facing the Trial for the offence punishable under the POCSO Act for molesting the victim, who is his own daughter and during the trial of the POCSO case, he threatened the witness, namely, his wife not to give any evidence against him. As a result, the case in Crime No.2 of 2021 was registered, which culminated into filing a final report.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is motivated complaint and the question of threatening the witness does not arise at all for the reason that in the POCSO case, the witnesses had already deposed before the Court, pursuant to which, the said case also ended in conviction.
2/4
Crl.OP.No. 10071 of 2022
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and on perusal of the statement of the witnesses, this Court finds that there is a prima facie material against the petitioner. There is no merits in the grounds raised by the petitioner to quash and there is no sufficient reason to interfere with the process of trial. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
5. It is made clear that the dismissal of the petition shall not stand
in the way of the petitioner to raise all the factual and legal pleas available
to him before the trial Court.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
27.06.2024
av
3/4
Crl.OP.No. 10071 of 2022
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
av
To
Crl.O.P.No.10071 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.5946 of 2022
27.06.2024
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the charge sheet in C.C.No.732 of 2022 for threatening a witness during a POCSO trial should be quashed against the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abdul Malik
The State represented by its Inspector of Police, W-25, All Women Police Station T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017
A.Ramlath
G. Jayachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
