Disposed¶29

Selvakumar v. M.M.M.Thiagarajan

Madras HC21 Apr 2025CRL MP/6010/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, 21.04.2025, N. Anand Venkatesh J. - recall petition in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023; Section 482 Cr.P.C.; Section 528 BNSS; Section 319 Cr.P.C.; addition of accused at any stage of trial till final judgment; investigation completed; final report/police report filed; petitioner in Crl.O.P. shown as witness L.W.3; audio recording of conversation; no complicity found; no further orders; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Clarification only: the Trial Court may add the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023 as an accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. if the trial establishes commission of an offence; no further orders passed on the request to recall the order dated 21.08.2023. ¶29

Selvakumar Vs M.M.M.Thiagarajan — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 21.08.2023 passed in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023 should be recalled and the 2nd respondent police directed to complete/complement investigation on the ground that the petitioner in that Crl.O.P. was complicit in the offence and used the order to escape consequences.

¶23

Court's answer

The investigation did not reveal the complicity of the petitioner in the Crl.O.P., and hence that petitioner has been shown as one of the witnesses (L.W.3) in the police report.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

If ultimately, during the course of trial, the role played by the petitioner in the Crl.O.P. establishes the commission of any offence, the Trial Court has the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to add an accused at any stage of the trial till the final judgment is pronounced.

¶28

Key takeaways

Except giving the above clarification, no further orders can be passed in the recall petition.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (Crl.M.P.No.6010 of 2025) filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. / Section 528 B.N.S.S. seeking recall of the order dated 21.08.2023 in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023 and completion of investigation based on an audio recording, on the grievance that the petitioner in that Crl.O.P. was involved in the offence and used the order to escape consequences. The Madras High Court (N. Anand Venkatesh, J.), by order dated 21.04.2025, noted that investigation stood completed and the police report was filed, in which the petitioner in the Crl.O.P. was shown as witness L.W.3. The Court held that the investigation had not revealed that petitioner's complicity, and clarified that if during trial his role established any offence, the Trial Court always has power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to add an accused at any stage of the trial till final judgment. Except for this clarification, no further orders were passed, and the petition was disposed of.

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.6010 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 21.04.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Crl.M.P.No.6010 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023

Selvakumar

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.M.M.M.Thiyagarajan

¶11

2.The State Rep. by its, The Inspector of Police, M4 Redhills Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

¶12

3.Mageshwari .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C / 528 of B.N.S.S., praying to recall the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023 by its order dated 21.08.2023 and thereby direct the 2^nd respondent police to complete the investigation based on the production of audio recording of the conversation between the petitioner and 1^st respondent.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Suresh For R1 : Mr.P.Sudalaiyandi For R2 : Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.M.P.No.6010 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This petition has been filed to recall the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023 dated 21.08.2023.

¶20

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for

¶21

the 1^st respondent and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the 2^nd respondent.

¶22

3.It is brought to the notice of this Court that the investigation has been completed and police report has been filed before the concerned jurisdictional Court. In the police report, the petitioner has been shown as L.W.3.

¶23

4.The main grievance expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in this recall petition is that the petitioner in the Crl.O.P. is very much involved in the commission of the offence and taking advantage of the order passed in the Crl.O.P., the petitioner in the Crl.O.P., has tried to escape from the consequences.

¶24

5.In the considered view of this Court, the investigation did not

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

Crl.M.P.No.6010 of 2025 in Crl.O.P.No.18684 of 2023

¶28

reveal the complicity of the petitioner in the Crl.O.P and hence, the petitioner in the Crl.O.P has been shown as one of the witnesses (L.W.3). If ultimately, during the course of trial, the role played by the petitioner establishes the commission of any offence, the Trial Court always has the power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., to add an accused at any stage of the trial till the final judgment is pronounced. Except giving this clarity, no further orders can be passed in this petition.

¶29

6.In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of

in the above terms.

21.04.2025

krk

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶34

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.