The Criminal Original Petition sought to quash an FIR regarding an altercation during a temple festival. The Court held that grounds raised could only be appreciated during investigation and dismissed the petition, directing a fair investigation.
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.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.07.2024
CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.7023 of 2024
1.K.Vetrivel
2.K.Karthik
3.K.Muthukrishnan
4.P.Madhan Alexandar
5.P.Murugan
6.N.Kannan ... Petitioners
Vs.
2.Mooventhan, Sub Inspector of Police, Irugankudi Police Station, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records relating to the case in
1/6
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
Cr.No.51 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same as illegal to the petitioners are concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan For R1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar, Government Advocate(Crl.side)
ORDER
This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Cr.No.51 of 2024 pending on the file of the first respondent Police as against the petitioners.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 22.04.2024, a peace committee meeting was conducted with regard to the celebration of Chitra Pournami festival in Arulmigu Vengadasalapathy Temple. In the meeting, the Tahsildar has permitted the village people to celebrate the festival and imposed 10 clauses of conditions. On 25.04.2024, when the chariot reached the occurrence place, the accused Nos.1 to 12 tried to put garland to their community leader and the same was objected by the others. Due to the same, the chariot could not reach the destination https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis within the time. When the defacto complainant, who is the Sub2/6
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
Inspector of Police, interfered in the situation, the accused has not cooperated with him. Hence, a case was registered in Cr.No.51 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 143 and 353 IPC. Challenging the same, the petitioners filed the present petition.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that after obtaining proper permission from the Tahsildar, the villagers participated in the temple festival and hence, registering a case under Section 143 IPC is not sustainable. Further, he submits that there is no specific overt act as against the petitioners. Accordingly, he prays to quash the impugned FIR.
4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent submits that the grounds raised by the petitioner can be appreciated only during the course of investigation. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the present petition.
5.This Court considered the rival submissions made on either side
and perused the materials available in the record.
3/6
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
6.As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side), the grounds raised in the present petition, can be appreciated only during the course of investigation and therefore, this Court is not inclined to quash the impugned FIR, which is pending at the stage of investigation. The investigation in Cr.No.51 of 2024 has to be conducted in a fair manner and the first respondent is expected to conduct the investigation in all the angles and not to file the final report mechanically. The first respondent shall appreciate the grounds raised in the present petition during the course of investigation and shall file final report. In the event of filing final report as against the petitioners, it is always open to them to challenge the final report, in the manner known to law. Expecting that a fair investigation will be conducted, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the investigation.
7.In the result, this criminal original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.07.2024
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis gns
4/6
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
To
5/6
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
B.PUGALENDHI,J
gns
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10432 of 2024
12.07.2024
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court should quash the FIR pending at the stage of investigation without appreciating the grounds raised.
Whether the grounds raised by the petitioners can be appreciated by the Court before the investigation is completed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K. Vetrivel
K. Karthik
K. Muthukrishnan
P. Madhan Alexandar
P. Murugan
N. Kannan
B. Pugalendhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
