Dismissed

B.Mohan v. the State Rep.by

Madras HC20 Dec 2024CRL OP/32014/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Crl.O.P. to quash an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed because the Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation was completed and a charge sheet had been filed with the Metropolitan Magistrate, leaving nothing to adjudicate in this petition.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition to quash FIR dismissed; petitioner at liberty to work out remedy known to law.

B.Mohan Vs the State Rep.by — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.32014 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.32014 of 2024 and

¶7

Crl.M.P.No.18240 of 2024

B.Mohan

... Petitioner

The State represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, K3, Aminjikarai Police Station, Aminjikarai, Chennai.

¶12

Parimala ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER:

¶14

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to F.I.R in Crime No.70 of 2024 dated 06.02.2024 on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

¶15

For Petitioner : M/s.F.Rita For R1 : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.32014 of 2024

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the

¶21

records relating to F.I.R in Crime No.70 of 2024 dated 06.02.2024 on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

¶23

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police on instructions submitted that after completion of investigation in Crime No.70 of 2024, charge sheet was filed through e-filing on 20.09.2024 vide e-filing No.LTN20230000018C2400275 before the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore. Since the first respondent-Police has completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet before the magistrate concerned, nothing survives for further adjudication in this Criminal Original Petition.

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

Crl.O.P.No.32014 of 2024

¶27

4. In view of the same, the Criminal Original Petition is

¶28

dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

¶29

20.12.2024

¶30

mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶31

¶32

The Sub Inspector of Police, K3, Aminjikarai Police Station, Aminjikarai, Chennai.

¶33

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

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

¶36

Crl.O.P.No.32014 of 2024

¶37

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

¶38

mfa

¶39

Crl.O.P.No.32014 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.No.18240 of 2024

¶40

20.12.2024

¶41

Page 4 of 4

¶42

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

B.Mohan v. the State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Mohan 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

Chitra Vs the Superintendent of Police

A.Naresh Kumar Vs State Rep.by

G.Senthil Vs the Superintendent of Police

Chinnagounder Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Amrendra Kumar Pal Vs the State Rep.by, the Inspector of Police

Asiya Begam Vs Pon. Sukumaran