Petitioners sought quashing of a charge-sheet for offences under Sections 447, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC arising out of a property dispute with a relative. The court found prima facie materials against them, held their grounds were matters for trial, and dismissed the petition.
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.O.P.No.30413 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.12.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Crl.O.P.No.30413 of 2024 and
Crl.M.P.Nos.17253 and 17265 of 2024
2. Praveen @ Prabu ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. The State by its
Krishnagiri District – 635 116.
2. Gokula Krishnan ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,/528 BNSS, 2023, to call for the records and quash the records in C.C.No.43 of 2023 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Denkanikottai.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Madhuprakash
For Respondents : Mr.S.Sugendran
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1
R2 – Not ready in notice
O R D E R
1/5
Crl.O.P.No.30413 of 2024
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to quash the charge-sheet in
C.C.No.43 of 2023 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Denkanikottai.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is a property dispute between the petitioners and the second respondent, who are none other than close relatives, in which, the first respondent had given a criminal colour to the civil case.
3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent/Police submitted that based on the complaint given by the second respondent/ de-facto complainant, the first respondent/Police registered a case against the petitioners and also laid a charge-sheet in C.C.No.43 of 2023 on the file of District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Denkanikottai against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 447, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) IPC and the petitioners have been arrayed as A1 and A2. He further submitted that trial is yet to be commenced.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
2/5
Crl.O.P.No.30413 of 2024
Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
5. There is no representation for the second respondent/ de-facto
complainant.
6. On a perusal of the records, it is seen that prima facie there are materials against the petitioners to proceed with the case further and the grounds taken by the petitioner are matter for trial and this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition and hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. The petitioners are at liberty to take all their defences before the trial Court during the trial in C.C.No.43 of 2023.
20.12.2024
Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms
3/5
Crl.O.P.No.30413 of 2024
To
2. The Inspector of Police, E3, Police Station, Rayakotai,
Krishnagiri District – 635 116.
4/5
Crl.O.P.No.30413 of 2024
P.VELMURUGAN, J ms
Crl.O.P.No.30413 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.Nos.17253 and 17265 of 2024
20.12.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the charge-sheet in C.C.No.43 of 2023 arising from a property dispute between relatives should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajalakshmi
Praveen @ Prabu
The State by its Inspector of Police, E3, Police Station, Rayakotai
Gokula Krishnan
P.Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
