Dismissed¶30

Gangai Athithan v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC4 Feb 2025CRL OP(MD)/2179/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quash petition rejected at initial investigation stage; Section 528 BNSS; FIR Crime No.208 of 2024; Vijayanarayanam Police Station; Tirunelveli; Village Administrative Officer complaint; pond sand loading by JCB; illegal sand removal; Section 303(2) BNS Act 2023; Section 21(4) Mines and Minerals Act 1957; political enmity/foisting contention premature; complaint discloses offences; liberty to challenge final report; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025; P. Dhanabal J.; 04.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the quash petition, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the final report, if any, filed by the respondent police in Crime No.208 of 2024, in the manner known to law; connected Miscellaneous Petition Crl.M.P(MD).No.1516 of 2025 closed.

Gangai Athithan Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the Criminal Original Petition praying for quashing of the FIR in Crime No.208 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police (Vijayanarayanam Police Station, Tirunelveli) should be granted. +2 more

¶18

Court's answer

Without any strong materials, it is not appropriate to consider the prayer of the petitioner.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

Investigation in Crime No.208 of 2024 being admittedly at the initial stage, the petitioners' arguments that there were procedural violations and that the case was foisted due to political enmity cannot be considered at this stage.

¶27

Key takeaways

At the quashing stage the Court's task was confined to examining whether the contents of the complaint constitute any offence.ratio¶27
As per the complaint, offences are made out.ratio¶30
It is for the first respondent to investigate the matter in a fair manner and to file the final report.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court - Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025 (with connected Crl.M.P(MD).No.1516 of 2025), filed under Section 528 of BNSS, decided 04.02.2025 by Justice P. Dhanabal. Petitioners Gangai Athithan and Murugesan sought quashing of FIR Crime No.208 of 2024 of Vijayanarayanam Police Station, Tirunelveli, registered on 17.08.2024 under Section 303(2) of BNS Act, 2023 and Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals Act, 1957 on the complaint of the Village Administrative Officer (second respondent) alleging pond-sand loading by JCB. Held: investigation was admittedly at the initial stage, so the contentions of political enmity/foisting and procedural violations could not be considered; the Court examined only whether the complaint disclosed offences and found that offences were made out; without strong materials it was inappropriate to entertain the prayer. Petition dismissed with liberty to challenge the final report, if filed; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.

¶1

Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated: 04.02.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶6

Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025 and Crl.M.P(MD).No.1516 of 2025

¶7

1.Gangai Athithan 2.Murugesan

¶8

.. Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.State of Tamil nadu, through the Inspector of Police, Vijayanarayanam Police Station, Tirunelveli.

¶11

2.Mahaharichandran

¶12

.. Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in Crime No.208 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.T.A.Ebenezer For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

¶15

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025

¶18

This petition is filed by the petitioner to quash the FIR in Crime No. 208 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police.

¶19

According to the petitioner, the second respondent/Village

¶20

Administrative Officer preferred complaint alleging that while he was patrolling, the first petitioner was sitting in two-wheeler and the second petitioner was loading pond sand by JCB in the lorry, on seeing him, the accused drove away the lorry. The Village Administrative Officer called the respondent police and the police took the JCB and two wheeler to the police station. On the next day morning the Village Administrative Officer went to the police station and preferred complaint at 08.00 am., based on which, the first respondent registered Crime No.208 of 2024 for the offence under Section 303(2) of BNS Act, 2023 and Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals Act, 1957. Infact there is a civil dispute between the first petitioner and his brother, due to political enmity, this case has been foisted against him. The said VAO is stranger to the first petitioner, but he mentioned the name of the first petitioner and the respondent police took

¶21

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025

¶23

away the first petitioner's two wheeler and JCB from the scene of occurrence in the night itself and fabricated the false story. The second respondent has no authority to make complaint under Mines and Minerals Act. There are procedural violation in respect of Mines and Minerals Act. Therefore, FIR registered against the petitioners is against law and which is liable to be quashed.

¶24

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed this quash petition since FIR registered recently on 17.08.2024 based on the complaint given by the Village Administrative Officer and now, the case is under investigation.

¶25

Heard both sides and perused the materials records.

¶26

It is an admitted fact that investigation in Crime No.208 of 2024

¶27

is at the initial stage and the arguments of the petitioners that there are procedural violation and due to political enmity, case has been foisted against him, cannot be considered at this stage. This Court has to see whether the contents of the complaint constitute any offence or not. As

¶28

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

Crl.O.P(MD).No.2179 of 2025

¶30

per the complaint, offences are made out. Therefore, it is for the first respondent to investigate the matter in a fair manner and to file final report. Without any strong materials, it is not appropriate to consider the prayer of the petitioner. Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the final report if any to be filed by the respondent police in Crime No.208 of 2024 in the manner known to law. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶31

04.02.2025

¶32

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Rmk

¶33

To:

¶34