Allowed¶31

Mohanraj v. State Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Feb 2026CRL OP/2158/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR Crime No.148/2019 (theft of river sand, Jedarpalayam Police Station, Namakkal District) allowed on limitation grounds: offence of 31.08.2019, final report under Section 379 IPC e-filed only on 25.06.2024, beyond the three-year period prescribed by Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C., hence cognizance barred. Statutes: Section 528 B.N.S.S. (quash petition), Section 514 BNS (raised by counsel), Section 379 IPC, Section 21(1) Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. Forum below: Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi. Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J., High Court of Madras, decided 03-02-2026.

What did the court decide?

All further proceedings pending against all the accused pursuant to Crime No.148 of 2019 quashed in their entirety; connected miscellaneous petition closed. ¶31

Mohanraj Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

All further proceedings pending against all the accused pursuant to Crime No.148 of 2019 quashed in their entirety; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.148 of 2019 should be quashed, as urged on the ground that the respondent failed to file the final report in time, attracting a limitation bar against taking cognizance. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

No useful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending; accordingly the petition was allowed and all further proceedings pursuant to Crime No.148 of 2019 were quashed in their entirety, with the connected miscellaneous petition closed.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

As per Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C., for the offence under Section 379 IPC carrying a maximum sentence of three years, the final report ought to have been filed within a period of three years from the date of registration of the First Information Report.

¶30

Key takeaways

The final report, e-filed on 25.06.2024 for an occurrence of 31.08.2019, was clearly beyond the period of limitation; therefore cognizance cannot be taken.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT — CRL OP No. 2158 of 2026 (with Crl.M.P.No.1438 of 2026), decided 03-02-2026 by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. (single Judge). Petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. by Mohanraj to quash FIR Crime No.148 of 2019 of Jedarpalayam Police Station, Namakkal District (alleged theft of 3 units of river sand) — Allowed. The offence allegedly occurred on 31.08.2019 and the FIR was registered the same day, initially for offences under Section 379 IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act; after investigation, the final report was e-filed only under Section 379 IPC before the Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi, and was yet to be taken on file. Since the maximum sentence for Section 379 IPC is three years, Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. required the final report to be filed within three years from registration of the FIR; e-filing on 25.06.2024 was clearly beyond the period of limitation, and cognizance therefore cannot be taken. Holding that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings pending, the Court allowed the petition, quashed all further proceedings against all the accused in their entirety, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.

¶1

CRL OP No. 2158 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

CRL OP No. 2158 of 2026 and Crl.M.P.No.1438 of 2026

Mohanraj

..Petitioner(s)

State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Jedarpalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. Crime No. 148/2019.

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., to call for the records relating to Crime No.148 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

¶13

For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.Anbuchezheiyan

¶14

For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the First

¶17

Information Report in Crime No.148 of 2019 pending on the file of the respondent.

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

CRL OP No. 2158 of 2026

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had committed

¶22

theft of 3 units of river sand from the river bed. Hence, the complaint.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the alleged

¶24

offence is stated to have taken place on 31.08.2019 and the case has been registered on the same day. In such circumstances, the final report ought to have been filed within a period of three years. However, the respondent has not filed the final report till date. Therefore, there is a bar under Section 514 of the BNS, against taking cognizance after the lapse of the period of limitation. Accordingly, the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings against him.

¶25

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that initially, a case was registered for the offences punishable under Section 379 of IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act. After completion of investigation, the first respondent e-filed the final report for the offences punishable only under Section 379 of IPC before the Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi and it is yet to be taken on file.

¶26

5 . The fact remains that the petitioner has been charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC for which the maxmimum

¶27

__________ Page2 of 4

¶28

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

¶29

CRL OP No. 2158 of 2026

¶30

sentence of imprisonment is 3 years. In such circumstances, as per Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C., the first respondent ought to have filed the final report within a period of three years from the date of registration of the First Information Report. Though the alleged occurrence is stated to have taken place on 31.08.2019, the final report has been e-filed only on 25.06.2024, which is clearly beyond the period of limitation. Therefore, cognizance cannot be taken.

¶31

6 . In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and all further proceedings pending against all the accused pursuant to Crime No.148 of 2019, on the file of the respondent Police, are hereby quashed in their entirety. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

03-02-2026

¶33

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶34

VKR

¶35

__________ Page3 of 4

¶36

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

¶37

CRL OP No. 2158 of 2026