CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.09.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022
&
Crl.M.P.No.14129 of 2022
S.Sanjay ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State by:-
The Inspector of Police,
AWPS – Valasaravakkam Police Station,
Valasaravakkam,
Chennai - 600087.
2. K.Sadhanya ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
praying to call for the records and quash the First Information Report
registered by the 1st respondent police in AWPS Valasaravakkam Crime No.1
of 2022.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.Muralidharan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Santhosh
Government Advocate (Crl.side)
For R1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 7
CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022
ORDER
This petition has been filed to call for the records and quash the First Information Report registered by the 1st respondent police in Crime No.1 of 2022.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the 2nd respondent, who is the estranged wife of the petitioner herein had lodged a complaint dated 06.07.2022 alleging that the petitioner had installed a GPS device in her bike/scooter without her knowledge and she was being constantly followed by the petitioner's henchmen and was also given veiled threats. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that only major allegation is installation of GPS device on the vehicle of the de- facto complainant Viz., 2nd respondent. Already there is a case pending between them in respect of custody of the child. While being so, a false complaint has been falsely foisted as against the petitioner. Hence he prayed to quash the same.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the 1st https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 2 of 7 CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022 respondent would submit that the investigation is almost completed and the respondent police have only to file final report.
4. Heard Mr.S.M.Muralidharan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Santhosh, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent.
5. It is seen from the First Information Report that there are specific allegations as against the petitioner to attract the offences under Sections 354D(2), 506(ii) of IPC and Section 4 of TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002, 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.
6. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.255 of 2019 dated 12.02.2019 in the case of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 3 of 7 CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022 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 reading of the complaint and consideration of the allegations therein, in the light of the statement made on https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 4 of 7 CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022 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."
7. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash the First Information Report. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. However, the 1st respondent is directed to complete the investigation https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5 of 7 CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022 in Crime No.1 of 2022 and file a final report within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.
12.09.2022 Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non Speaking order mpl https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 6 of 7 CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
mpl To
1. The Inspector of Police, AWPS – Valasaravakkam Police Station, Valasaravakkam, Chennai - 600087.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
CRL.O.P.No.21835 of 2022 & Crl.M.P.No.14129 of 2022 12.09.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 7 of 7