Madras High Court
G.K.Karthikeyan vs State By Inspector Of Police on 2 December, 2021
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021 and
Crl.M.P.Nos.9748, 9750 & 9751 of 2021
G.K.Karthikeyan ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.17773 of 2021
P.Narayanan ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.17777 of 2021
K.Natarajan ... Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.17780 of 2021
Versus
State by Inspector of Police,
CCIW, CIO, CH East,
Crime No.01/1999.
(U/s 408, 409 & 477(A) of IPC) ... Respondent in all cases
COMMON PRAYER: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order dated
04.09.2021 made in Crl.M.P.Nos.4439, 4440 & 4420 of 2021 in
C.C.Nos.214, 211 & 212 of 2008 respectively on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamalle and consequently allow the petition
filed under Sec.311 to recall the PW-1 to PW4 and PW-6 for subjecting
them to cross examination in C.C.Nos.214, 211 & 212 of 2008 on the file
of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamalle.
In all cases:
For Petitioners : Mr.N.Nithianandam
For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
*****
Page No.1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
COMMON ORDER
All these Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to set aside the
orders, dated 04.09.2021 in Crl.M.P.Nos.4439, 4440 & 4420 of 2021 in
C.C.Nos.214, 211 & 212 of 2008, passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners have filed petitions under Section 311 Cr.P.C., in
Crl.M.P.Nos.4439, 4440 & 4420 of 2021 in C.C.Nos.214, 211 & 212 of
2008 on 04.09.2021, in which the trial Court on the same day, dismissed
the petitions on the ground of inordinate delay. The learned counsel
further submitted that the delay is not due to the petitioners. For the past
ten years, the case bundles before the trial Court were found missing, due
to which, the cases were periodically adjourned causing great hardship to
the petitioners all these years. Contrary to the same, the trial Court
erroneously attributing the delay in filing the petitions under Section 311
Cr.P.C., on the petitioners, which is not proper. Finally, the case bundles
retraced in the year 2020. In support of his submission, the learned
Page No.2 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
counsel for the petitioners relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of “The State Represented by the Deputy
Superintendent of Police Versus Tr.N.Seenivasagan in Special Leave
to Appeal (Crl.)Nos.3104-3105/2020, dated 24.06.2019”, wherein it had
held that 'an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C could not be rejected
on the sole ground that the case had been pending for an inordinate
amount of time'. Hence, he prayed for setting aside the orders of the trial
Court, dated 04.09.2021.
3.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing
for the respondent Police submitted that in C.C.No.211 of 2008, totally
three accused; in C.C.No.212 of 2008, totally two accused and in
C.C.No.214 of 2008, totally two accused. A1 initially pleaded guilty and
he was convicted by the trial Court on 30.09.2009, as against which,
appeal was filed before the learned II Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Thiruvallur in C.A.Nos.41 to 44 of 2009. The learned II
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur, by judgment, dated
08.06.2010 confirmed the judgment of the trial Court. Thereafter, the
Page No.3 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
bundles were managed to be held in one place or other and no trial could
be proceeded for all these years. Finally, the bundle could be traced out
only in the year 2020. He further submitted that no surcharge
proceedings initiated against the petitioners sofar.
4.This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the
materials available on records.
5.In C.C.No.211 of 2008, totally 6 witnesses (PW1 to PW6); in
C.C.No.212 of 2008, totally 5 witnesses (PW1 to PW5) and in
C.C.No.214 of 2008, totally 8 witnesses (PW1 to PW8). On perusal of
the statements of these witnesses, it is seen that the entire averments
seems to be against the Secretary, who was already convicted by the trial
Court, which was confirmed by the lower appellate Court. As far as these
petitioners are concerned, one witness has stated that the petitioners were
present at the time of fraud played by A1. Other than that, nothing
against the petitioners. Admittedly, no liability or surcharge proceedings
against the petitioners. Hence, again recalling the said witnesses would
Page No.4 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
serve no purpose and it would further delay the outcome of the trial.
6.In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to set aside the
orders, dated 04.09.2021 in Crl.M.P.Nos.4439, 4440 & 4420 of 2021 in
C.C.Nos.214, 211 & 212 of 2008 passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee and the same is hereby confirmed.
Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
02.12.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
vv2
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II,
Poonamallee.
2.The Inspector of Police,
CCIW, CIO, CH East,
Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
Page No.5 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
CRL.O.P.Nos.17773, 17777 & 17780 of 2021
02.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
