Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of FIR for alleged theft of rubber trees from forest land. Court held FIR disclosed prima facie offence and cannot be quashed before investigation. Petition dismissed.
Criminal Original Petition quashing the impugned FIR stands dismissed.
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.19181 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.06.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN
Crl.O.P(MD)No.19181 of 2021 and Crl.MP(MD)No.10682 of 2021
T.P.David Dhas ... Petitioner / Accused
Vs.
Complainant
PRAYER:- Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the FIR registered in Crime No.74 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.V.Rajiv Rufus
1/6
Crl.O.P(MD).No.19181 of 2021
O R D E R
This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the
impugned FIR in Crime No.74 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner / accused removed 50 numbers of Rubber Trees in R.S.No.216 at Kadayal Village, Kanyakumari District without getting prior permission from the concerned Government Authorities. Hence, the second respondent lodged a complaint, based on which, a case in Cr.No.74 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.
2/6
Crl.O.P(MD).No.19181 of 2021
Petitions filed by the petitioner herein against the Forest Officials for corruption and illegal rectification, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the above said officials by this Court. Thereby, with an intention to harass the petitioner, present FIR has been registered against the petitioner. The alleged removed trees were planted and grown by the petitioner on his own land. So, the offence under Section 379 of IPC would not made out as against the petitioner. Accordingly, he prayed for quashing of the impugned FIR.
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first
respondent submitted that the Principal District Munsif Court, Kuzhithurai, by the order dated 19.09.1983, in O.S.No.1 of 1981, clearly held that the suit property belongs to the Government cannot be disputed. The possession of the plaintiffs cannot therefore ripen into title as they have been in possession only under the government paying kuthagaipathyam tax and penalty under B memo. As such, the government is fully competent to evict the plaintiffs from the suit properties under due processes of law. Against which, the plaintiffs have not filed any appeal. Hence, it is made clear that the petitioner is not a true owner of the land in R.S.No.216 at Kadayal Village, Kanyakumari
3/6
Crl.O.P(MD).No.19181 of 2021
District. He had recognized the ownership of the government over the land and paid penalty for cutting trees illicitly on previous occasions, he is bound to pay penalty or liable for criminal proceedings as per law. Since, there is specific allegation against the petitioner, he vehemently opposed to allow this petition.
4/6
Crl.O.P(MD).No.19181 of 2021
learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and perused the records available on records.
7.It is seen from the First Information Report that there are specific allegations as against the petitioner to attract the offences, which has to be investigated in depth. Further the FIR is not an encyclopedia and it need not contain all facts and it cannot be quashed in the threshold. This Court finds that the FIR discloses prima facie commission of cognizable offence and as such this Court cannot interfere with the investigation. The investigating machinery has to step in to investigate, grab and unearth the crime in accordance with the procedures prescribed in the Code.
21.06.2024
NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No dss
5/6
Crl.O.P(MD).No.19181 of 2021
A.A.NAKKIRAN, J.
dss
To
Crl.O.P(MD)No.19181 of 2021 and Crl.MP(MD)No.10682 of 2021
21.06.2024
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR disclosing prima facie commission of cognizable offence can be quashed at the threshold.
Whether the court can interfere with the investigation when specific allegations are made against the accused.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
T.P. David Dhas
The State
Sherlinsheeba
A.A. Nakkiran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
