Allowed

Siva v. the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Madras HC15 Oct 2024CRL OP/17770/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR registered against the petitioners under the SC/ST Act, finding no material to substantiate allegations of caste-based abuse or trespass, and holding that the case was filed with a criminal colour to maliciously prosecute the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the FIR in Cr.No.220 of 2024 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kedar Police Station, Villupuram District.

Siva Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police — Caste Atrocities | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl. O.P.No.17770 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 15.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

¶6

Crl.OP.No.17770 of 2024

¶7

and Crl.MP.No.10552 of 2024

¶8

1. Siva

¶9

2. Indhira .. Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ginjee Sub Division, Villupuram District.

¶12

2. State by

¶13

The Inspector of Police, Kedar Police Station, Villupuram District. ( Cr.No.220 of 2024)

¶14

3. Vijaya

¶15

.. Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the entire records pertaining to the Cr.No.220 of 2024 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kedar Police Station, Villupuram District and quash the same.

¶17

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

¶18

1/5

¶19

Crl. O.P.No.17770 of 2024

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Gopalakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 and R2 : No appearance for R3

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the FIR in Cr.No.220 of 2024 on the file of second respondent police based on the complaint given by the third respondent. Notice served to the third respondent privately, no appearance on her behalf.

¶23

The perusal of the complaint indicates that the third respondent

¶24

belongs to the Scheduled Caste community, along with her eleven persons, Government has issued free patta for land without costs. On the strength of the patta, she has put up construction in the land allotted to her. While so, the petitioner herein, destroyed the thatched bath room and quarrelled and also abused the daughter-in-law of the complainant in filthy language.

¶25

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

¶26

2/5

¶27

Crl. O.P.No.17770 of 2024

¶28

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that there

¶29

is no averments in the complaint that the petitioner abused the daughterin-law of complainant calling her caste or he trespassed into the property of the complainant. While so, the police themselves had included Sections which are not form part of the complaint. He further submits that it is purely a cock and bull story invented by the complainant to maliciously prosecute the petitioner who happens to be her neighbour.

¶30

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that based

¶31

on the complaint and the community of the complainant, case has been registered under SC/ST Act and further in this case is entrusted to Officer in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police. They have fairly conceded that there is no injury to the complainant to attract Section 324 of IPC.

¶32

This Court on considering the material find that it is an attempt to trespass into the land of the petitioner by the defacto complainant given a criminal colour as if the petitioner abused the daughter of the defacto complainant in filthy language and called her by her community name. Where there is no material to substantiate the complaint. Therefore, this 3/5

¶33

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

¶34

Crl. O.P.No.17770 of 2024

¶35

case to be quashed on the ground of malicious prosecution.

¶36

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

¶37

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

15.10.2024

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ginjee Sub Division, Villupuram District.

¶42

2. The Inspector of Police, Kedar Police Station, Villupuram District.

¶43

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶44

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

¶45

4/5

¶46

Crl. O.P.No.17770 of 2024

¶47

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

¶48

¶49

Crl.OP.No.17770 of 2024

¶50

15.10.2024

¶51

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

¶52

5/5

Siva v. the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siva v. the Deputy Superintendent 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

B.Krishna Singh Vs the State Represented by Its

Ramesh Vs District Manager

Saathaiaya, Vs Mr.Krishna Kumar

Shirley Salome Vs S.Durga

M/S. Manpuria Agro Products Private Limited Vs M/S. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited.

Sivaraj Vs the District Collector