CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:08.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.O.P.No. 21482 of 2022
and
Crl.MP.No.13944 of 2022
1. V.S.K.Amaranath
2. A.Sundari
3. Indumathi Raghunathan ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. The State rep by
The Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Station,
Tiruvallur
Crime No.9 of 2022
2. Tmt.Kuppabai ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the records on the file of the respondent Police in Crime
No.9/2022, and to quash the same by allowing the above Criminal Original
Petition.
For Petitioners : Mr.N.Palanikumar
For R1 : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R. in Crime No.9 of 2022 registered by the first respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 323 of IPC, as against the petitioners.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are in-laws of the defacto complainant's daughter. It is alleged that the petitioners along with 1st accused harassed the defacto complainant's daughter by demanding more dowry. Thereafter, de-facto complainant approached the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvallur in C.M.P.No.6019 of 2021 for direction to register the FIR, based on which, the present FIR was said to be registered against the petitioners and pending investigation at the respondent police.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without any base, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.9 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 498(A), 406 and 323 of IPC of IPC, as against the petitioners. Hence he prayed to quash the same.
Page 2 of 8https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the investigation is almost completed and the respondent police have only to file final report.
6. Heard Mr.N.Palani kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.
7. It is seen from the First Information Report that there are specific allegations as against the petitioners to attract the offence, 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.
8. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Page 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022 Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.255 of 2019 dated 12.02.2019 in the case of Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. the State of Maharashtra & ors., as follows:-
"4. The only point that arises for our consideration in this case is whether the High Court was right in setting aside the order by which process was issued. It is settled law that the Magistrate, at the stage of taking cognizance and summoning, is required to apply his judicial mind only with a view to taking cognizance of the offence, or in other words, to find out whether a prima facie case has been made out for summoning the accused persons. The learned Magistrate is not required to evaluate the merits of the material or evidence in support of the complaint, because the Magistrate must not undertake the exercise to find out whether the materials would lead to a conviction or not.
5. Quashing the criminal proceedings is called for only in a case where the complaint does not disclose any offence, or is frivolous, vexatious, or oppressive. If the allegations set out in the complaint do not constitute the offence of which cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate, it is open to the High Court to quash the same.
It is not necessary that a meticulous analysis of the case should be done before the Trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or acquittal. If it appears on a Page 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022 reading of the complaint and consideration of the allegations therein, in the light of the statement made on oath that the ingredients of the offence are disclosed, there would be no justification for the High Court to interfere. ......................
9. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel and examined the material on record, we are of the considered view that the High Court ought not to have set aside the order passed by the Trial Court issuing summons to the Respondents. A perusal of the complaint discloses that prima facie, offences that are alleged against the Respondents. The correctness or otherwise of the said allegations has to be decided only in the Trial. At the initial stage of issuance of process it is not open to the Courts to stifle the proceedings by entering into the merits of the contentions made on behalf of the accused. Criminal complaints cannot be quashed only on the ground that the allegations made therein appear to be of a civil nature. If the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused are prima facie made out in the complaint, the criminal proceeding shall not be interdicted."
9. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash the First Information Report. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Page 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022 Petition stands dismissed. However, the first respondent is directed to complete the investigation in Crime No.9 of 2022 and file a final report within a pe riod of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order, before the jurisdiction Magistrate, if not already filed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
08.09.2022 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non Speaking order rgm/sma Page 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022 To
1. The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Tiruvallur Crime No.9 of 2022
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page 7 of 8https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.21482 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Sma/Rgm CRL.O.P.No. 21482 of 2022 and Crl.MP.No.13944 of 2022 08.09.2022 Page 8 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis