Allowed

Sundaramoorthy v. Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer (I/C)

Madras HC1 Feb 2024CRL OP/4726/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of a show cause notice issued under Section 107 Cr.P.C. concerning alleged annoyance to the public by an unregistered trust conducting prayers. The court found the first respondent failed to assign reasons as required by law and quashed the notice, directing police to investigate the trust's compliance with law.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sundaramoorthy Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue… — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01.02.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶6

CRL.OP No. 4726 of 2022

¶7

and CRL MP No. 2664 of 2022

¶8

1 SUNDARAMOORTHY

¶9

S/O. SRINIVASAN EAST STREET SALAI AGARAM

¶10

VILLUPURAM.

¶11

2 JOTHI

¶12

S/O. SUNDARAMOORTHY EAST STREET SALAI AGARAM VILLUPURAM.

¶13

3 KALIYAPERUMAL

¶14

S/O. KRISHNAMOORTHY SALAI OTTU STREET KOLIYANUR VILLUPURAM.

¶15

4 PERIYASAMY

¶16

S/O. BALAKRISHNAN IYYANAR KOIL STREET

¶17

SALAI AGARAM VILLUPURAM.

¶18

5 VENKATAPATHY

¶19

S/O. KANNAPPAN PALLAKOODA STREET

¶20

THODARNTHANUR VILLUPURAM.

¶21

...Petitioners

¶22

Vs.

¶23

1 SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE CU M REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFCIER (I/C) VILLUPURAM.

¶24

2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE VALAVANUR POLICE STATION VILLUPURAM TK VILLUPURAM DISTRICT.

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

...Respondents PRAYER : This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call

¶28

for the records pertaining to the impugned show cause notice issued by the 1st respondent herein in Na.Ka.A1/Si.Pa.31/2021 dated 08.02.2022 and quash the same.

¶29

For petitioner : Mr.C. Karthikeyan

¶30

For Respondents : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar

¶31

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶32

ORDER

¶33

The petitioner herein filed this petition to call for the records

¶34

pertaining to the impugned show cause notice issued by the 1st respondent herein in Na.Ka.A1/Si.Pa.31/2021 dated 08.02.2022 and quash the same.

¶35

Heard both sides.

¶36

3 . The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that show cause

¶37

notice issued by the first respondent herein is against law and without application of mind and also not followed the procedures laid down under Section 111 of Cr.P.C. Further, the respondents not given the reasons for the satisfaction arrived by him to initiate proceedings under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. which required proper information have been given notice so he

¶38

prays to quash the proceedings and allow this petition.

¶39

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

¶40

¶41

The learned Government Advocate Criminal side, submits that report of the revenue officials dated 27.01.2024, A party namely Paul Raj and others running unauthorized Trust without obtaining proper registration and also attempted to construct the building in order to run the Trust and the same was rightly enquired by the revenue officials hence he prayed to dismiss the petition as no merits.

¶42

On perusal of the the said report one Victor conducting prayer by building church and caused annoyance to the public. But there is no procedure was followed to run the alleged Church and he attempted to cause annoyance to the people by doing prayers with loud speaker it cause annoyance to the public. Therefore, the report clearly shows that A party caused annoyance to the local people by conducting prayers without following any procedure as contemplated under law, the reason assigned by the petitioners as such is maintainable. Considering the facts of the case, the prosecution is directed to investigate the A party and their Trust whether they are following the rule of law to run the Trust ? Further, while issuing the show cause notice the first respondent has not assigned the reason as required under law. Hence, the show cause notice issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka. A1/S1.pa. 31/2021 dated 08.02.2022 is quashed.

¶43

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

¶44

¶45

6. In the result, this petition is allowed. No Costs.

¶46

Consequentially connected miscellaneous petition(s) closed.

¶47

7. Post the matter on 20.06.2024 for reporting compliance.

¶48

01.02.2024

¶49

pbl

¶50

To The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶51

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

¶52

¶53

T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

¶54

pbl

¶55

CRL.OP No. 4726 of 2022 and CRL MP No. 2664 of 2022

¶56

01.02.2024

¶57

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

Sundaramoorthy v. Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer (I/C)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sundaramoorthy v. Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer (I/C)

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaja Hussain Vs the Inspector of Police

Kathirvel Vs the State Rep by Its

L.Bharani Leela Vs State Rep by the Inspector of Police

Suresh Kumar Vs the State Rep by

The Union of India Vs Rajathi

M.Sathiyamoorthy Vs the Inspector of Police