Complainant's revision challenged dismissal of his second petition under Section 319 Cr.P.C. seeking summoning of additional accused deleted from the final report. The court held the second petition was barred by earlier dismissals confirmed by this Court and the Supreme Court, and no material existed for summoning; revision 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.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 22.07.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
M.Deivam
... Petitioner/Complainant/Appellant
Vs.
The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Theni District. ... Respondent/Respondent/Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the entire relevant records of the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Theni in Cr.M.P.No.7363 of 2023, dated 16.02.2024 in C.C.No.273 of 2016 and set aside the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Deivam Party-in-person
For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor * * * * *
ORDER
The Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order dated 16.02.2024 in Cr.M.P.No.7363 of 2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Theni in C.C.No.273 of 2016.
1/7
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
sum and substance of the petition is that the investigating agency has not arrayed many other accused. At this stage, the petitioner filed the petition making the allegation against the prosecution agency/investigating agency and also the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) represented before the Court below.
“to call for the entire relevant records of the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Theni in Cr.M.P.No.7363 of 2023, dated 16.02.2024 in C.C.No.273 of 2016 and set aside the same.”
4.The learned trial Judge has dismissed the petition on two grounds:
“(1)kDjhuh; jdJ thjj;jpw;F Mjuhthf jhf;fy; bra;Js;s Crl.A.No.78888 of 2019 Sukhpal Singh Khaira Vs. The State of Punjab vd;w Kd; jPh;g;g[ ,t;tHf;F r';fjpfSf;F bghUe;jp tuhJ. nkYk; ,nj tHf;fpy; ,nj kDjhuh; F.tp.K.r. gphpt[ 319-d; fPH; Vw;fdnt kD jhf;fy; bra;J mJ Vw;fdnt js;Sgo
2/7
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
nra;ag;gl;L tpl;lJ vd;gJk;> tHf;F nfhg;gpid ghprPypj;J ghh;j;jjpy; njhpatUfpwJ.
(2)vdnt kDjhuhpd; kDit mDkjpg;gjw;F nghJkhd kw;Wk; jFe;j fhuz';fs; VJk; Twg;gltpy;iy vd;Wk; Mtz';fs; VJk; rkh;g;gpf;fg;gltpy;iy vd;Wk; Kot[ fz;L kD js;Sgo bra;ag;gLfpwJ.”
5.He has earlier filed a petition in Cr.M.P.No.5159 of 2017 under Section
319 of Cr.P.C. and the same was dismissed on 21.09.2017. Thereafter, he preferred a revision before this Court in Crl.R.C.(MD)No.435 of 2018 and the
same was dismissed on 31.08.2018 and thereafter, he preferred Special Leve Petition(Crl.)No.1745 of 2019 and the same was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the said circumstances, the second petition filed by the petitioner under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Apart from that there is no material to initiate the proceedings as against them.
6.The learned trial Judge has perused all the records and found that there
was no materials to issue the summon under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. Challenging the same, he filed a petition and appeared as party-in-person and made detailed submission and he has stated that after dismissal of the Special Leave Petition
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, all the witnesses have stated about the role
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
played by the accused. At this stage 319 of Cr.P.C has to be considered by the learned trial Judge, but without considering the same, he dismissed the petition.
7.To substantiate the argument, he produced the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Vs. The State of Punjab in Crl.A.No. 888 of 2019.
8.This Court considered the rival submission of the party in person.
9.When a question was raised by this Court to the party-in-person whether the petition under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., was dismissed and he affirmed that it was dismissed and the same was confirmed by this Court and Special Leave Petition was also dismissed.
10.Further the learned trial Judge has also considered the entire materials and found that there were no sufficient materials to invoke Section 319 of Cr.P.C. and the learned trial Judge considered the entire evidence and this Court perused the entire records. No materials available on record to prosecute. All the materials are already considered by the learned trial Judge, confirmed by this Court and also affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Once again similar relief with different prayer cannot be entertained.
4/7
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
11.In such circumstances, this Court has no jurisdiction to interfere in the findings of the fact by the learned trial Judge. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was also considered by the latest Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
12.The Hon'ble Constitution Bench has clearly stated that only if sufficient material is available to record a conviction, then only power under section 319 of Cr.P.C., can be invoked as stated in the case of Sukhpal Singh
Khaira Vs. The State of Punjab in Crl.A.No.885 of 2019 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
13.In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, this Court finds no merit in this criminal revision case. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision case stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
22.07.2024
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No RJR/ sbn
5/7
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
To
6/7
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
RJR/ sbn
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.298 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.3373 of 2024
22.07.2024
7/7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a second petition under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to summon additional accused was maintainable after prior dismissal and confirmation up to the Supreme Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sukhpal Singh Khaira Vs. The State of PunjabApplied¶12
Crl.A.No.888 of 2019
3 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Deivam
The Inspector of Police, CBCID, Theni District
K.K.Ramakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
